Stop and Frisk is an ongoing issue for New York City that doesn’t necessarily have a quick fix. Supporters of the practice focus on the decreasing crime rates in New York City over the past decade. On the other hand, challengers continually cite how the majority of people stopped are of African American and Hispanic descent. This wouldn’t be an issue, except for the fact that the New York Times states that these demographic backgrounds only make up approximately half of the city.
What I found rather alarming was the percentage of stop and frisks that turn out to be false alarms. According to the New York Times article, 90% of stops end up in disappointment for police officers. I agree with the judge’s stance on how being stopped, frisked, and nothing happening is a rather humiliating experience. To me, the process would be more justified if a higher percentage of frisks resulted in some sort of summons, or arrest. However nine out of ten times, these people are doing nothing wrong and the police officers deemed their activity suspicious.
Deeming activity suspicious brings me to my next point. Who determines what kind of activity really is considered “suspicious”? According to the NY Times article, the judge declares that cops are too quick to jump the gun on suspicious activity. She cites instances of cops stopping people for “walking in a certain way, grabbing at a pocket or looking over one’s shoulder.” To most people, looking back behind you shouldn’t be a reason to be frisked. This doesn’t seem to be an issue of suspicious activity, but rather of racial and physical appearance.
I recently watched a video clip of an African American adolescent, who took it upon himself to record himself being stopped and frisked. After being previously stopped just a couple blocks back, this young man knew that the cops were looking to get him in trouble. The video contains an audio track of the two officers stopping the boy for suspiciously having an empty back. After explaining to the officers that the backpack was for his sweatshirt, the two officers verbally assault him. One even goes as far as threatening to break the boy’s arm.
Even with instances like the one previously mentioned, officers will continue this practice. In the video I watched, anonymous police officers told stories of how their bosses encouraged them to complete a certain number of frisks. They even discussed the repercussions of not following orders, which could involve things relocating them to bad neighborhoods or making them work weekends. With this being such a hot button issue, I’m curious to see how the city will ensure that this practice will not involve any form of racial profiling in the future.
Question for discussion: Do pilot programs (as mentioned by the judge) have any future in New York City?
