The Stop, Question, and Frisk Program essay
Each year thousands of Americans are stopped by the police in order to be questioned and frisked. Everyone understands that each stop, question and frisk encounter violated the established constitutional rights. The legal issues which refer to the Stop, Question, and Frisk policy are associated with violation of certain rules that create a debate regarding the validity of the practices. The controversial Stop, Question, and Frisk practices require thorough investigation. It is illegal to aggressively stop and question American citizens who merely enter public places. In many cases, law enforcement personnel uses creative ways to stop, question and frisk people who have shown no evidence of being involved in criminal activity. For example, the New York Police Department’s “Operation Clean Halls” has been used since 1991 allowing local police officers to conduct the so-called “vertical patrols” by providing well-organized stop-and-frisk searches in hallways of public buildings (Mathias, 2012). Actually, the Stop, Question, and Frisk practiced in New York City by the City Police Department stands for the legal procedure, which requires stop and question thousands of people, as well as frisk them for weapons, drugs and other contraband. In fact, the Stop, Question, and Frisk practices are based on the established laws and regulations that can be found in the Section 140.50 of the New York State Criminal Procedure Law. According to statistical data regarding stop, question and frisk practices, in 2011, 684,330 people were stopped, the majority of them were African-Americans or Latinos (Devereaux, 2012). In this paper, the controversial issues about the Stop, Question, and Frisk practices will be investigated. It is hypothesized that the Stop, Question, and Frisk program fosters racial profiling and leads to discrimination toward African Americans and Latinos. It is necessary to achieve a balance between the constitutional rights and the policy duties.
Literature Review
The issue regarding the Stop, Question, and Frisk program has been wildly discussed in academic literature and the mass media sources. The following eleven literature reviews attempt to demonstrate the hypothesis and provide comprehensive support for it.
In the newspaper article by Ryan Devereaux (2012), several important questions were discussed in relation to the Stop, Question, and Frisk practices. It has been found that in 2011, 684,330 people were stopped, and the majority of them were African-Americans or Latinos (Devereaux, 2012). This fact means the overwhelming majority of people stopped by the police were the people of color. Besides, the Stop, Question, and Frisk practices foster distrust toward the police in African American and Latino communities. Many young people have the sense of fear caused by the police stop-and-frisks.
In the article by Michael M. Grynbaum and Marjorie Connelly, the New York’s stop, question, and frisk policy has been criticized because it allows the police to detain any person they find suspicious. Although that policy has been put in practice in order to succeed in combating violent crimes, today there is much evidence that it promotes racial profiling. It has been found that the majority of residents claim that the Police Department “favors whites over blacks,” according to the findings taken from The New York Times poll (Grynbaum & Connelly, 2012).
Another researcher and journalist, Joseph Goldsteinsept supports the position of the previous authors. He has found that in eastern Brooklyn, many young people try to avoid clasping hands when greeting each other in the street because they are “fearful that their grasp might be mistaken for a drug deal and invite a search by the police” (Goldsteinsept, 2014, p.1).
In the study conducted by David Weisburd and colleagues (2014), special attention is paid to the role of policing practices in the New York crime decline. The researchers highlight the impact of innovations implemented in the New York police strategies. It has been found that the New York City Police Department (NYPD) has contributed to the crime drop in the area over the last years. They examined the data on crime and stop, question and frisks policy implementation in order to prove the fact that the stop, question and frisks practices are “concentrated at crime hot spots” (Weisburd et al., 2014, p. 129). The researchers raise concerns regarding possible negative effects of the stop, question and frisks practices.
In the article by David A. Harris (1995), the cases of the stop, question and frisks allow the police to conduct searches and seizures in the streets, making the police officers act without any probable cause. This article shows that the policy requires balancing the interests of the police and private interests.
In the study conducted by Andrew Gelmana and colleagues (2007), there is much evidence that the police officers tend to stop individuals who belong to racial and ethnic minority groups more often than white people based on their proportions in the overall population of the city (p. 813). Researchers support the ideas of previous authors that persons of African and Hispanic descent face discrimination as they are stopped, questioned and frisked more frequently than white people.
One more article that criticizes the stop, question and frisks policy is the article by Christopher Mathias. A report on NYPD stop, question and frisks policy calls for a comprehensive internal audit. One of the benefits is the “the effectiveness of stop and frisk” in the prevention of carrying guns on the street (Mathias, 2012). However, the author states that there are more weaknesses than strengths of this policy. People who face these practices point out to the fact that many stops are illegal (Mathias, 2012). This fact means that many stops lack the proper justification. Innocent people suffer from injustices and violation of human rights.
At the same time, there are many proponents of the stop, question and frisks policy. The article written by Joseph Ferrandino (2010) provides a comprehensive analysis of the policy, placing emphasis on the benefits of the stop, question and frisks practices. The analysis of New York Police Department (NYPD) stop and frisk practices has been focused on its equity and effectiveness, including technical efficiency. This research reflects the police efficiency, setting the foundation for future investigation of the existing models as well as the outcomes resulting from frisks.
In the article by Jeffrey Fagan and colleagues (2011), the discussion of the positive and negative consequences of New York City’s modern policing strategies helps to assess the necessity of making an analysis of stop and frisk. The researchers states that stop, question and frisk practice was an “essential feature, perhaps the most important and active ingredient, in the regime of Order Maintenance Policing (OMP) that began in New York City in 1994” (Fagan, 2011, p. 1). In fact, the research is based on highlighting the fairness of the practice as the central motive of the reactions of people from different ethnic backgrounds, including Whites, African-Americans, and Hispanics to experiences with the police. It has been found that all people want the police to act fairly in relation to minorities.
Besides, in the article by Kevin Buckler and George E. Higgins (2014), special attention is paid to the existing perceived injustice and crime policy preference. The aggressiveness of the policy influence racial and ethnic differences in perceptions of residents, but the stop-and-frisk practices are effective at reducing the rate of violent crime in the region, as well as the rate of gun offenses (Buckler & Higgins, 2014). The research provides an analysis of the key findings, which contribute to the implementation of the policy in the future. Moreover, the implications for future research are discussed.
Finally, in Fallon’s article, the Stop, Question and Frisk policy is assessed as effective, although it challenges constitutional rights mentioned in the Fourth Amendment. There is a necessity to update the policy in some way, adding the force of law and limiting the ability of the police officers to make adequate policy decisions, without discrimination (Fallon, 2013).
Thus, it is necessary to conclude that the issue regarding the Stop, Question, and Frisk program remains a controversial issue, although the literature reviews provided in this paper point out many positive effects of the policy on society in general and each citizen in particular.
Discussion
The New York Police Department’s practices are aimed at reducing crime rate in the region. The Stop, Question, and Frisk program has both positive and negative aspects that should be taken into consideration by the government. There is much evidence that the Stop, Question, and Frisk program demonstrates the elements of racial and ethnic division between Whites and minority groups on the issues of apparent inequality, injustice and the Stop, Question, and Frisk policy preference (Buckler & Higgins, 2014). Many researchers explore racial and ethnic variation that exists among New York City residents, placing emphasis on the aggressiveness of the Stop, Question and Frisk policy. This fact means that the policy influences racial and ethnic differences in perceptions of American citizens. The Stop, Question and Frisk policy can be very effective in the ways to reduce violent crime and gun offenses, but it may be ineffective in promotion of racial equality and reduction of racial discrimination in the United States. Today everyone in the United States is aware of the fact that racial and ethnic differences in perceptions of citizens are affected by the fact that the police officers treat Blacks and Hispanics differently than Whites.
In addition, it is obvious that current situation regarding the implementation of the Stop, Question and Frisk policy presents a dilemma for American society. On the one hand, it is the U.S. constitutional law that individuals should be free from the arbitrary police intrusions on their privacy rights. At the same time, the effectiveness of law enforcement practices depends on the development and implementation of adequate programs aimed at reducing violence and crime rate through maintenance of safe streets. If police officers are given an opportunity to stop, question and frisk Americans who are reasonably suspected by the police to be involved in criminal activity, the crime rate may be reduced to minimum.
In general, recent research places emphasis on the discussion of the positive and negative consequences of the New York Police Department’s modern policing strategies in order to evaluate the necessity of making changes in the Stop, Question and Frisk policy (Buckler & Higgins, 2014; Fallon, 2013; Ferrandino, 2013). It is very important to achieve a comprehensive balance between the constitutional rights provided to American citizens and the policy duties mentioned in the police code of conduct presents a real challenge for any police officer. Recent research shows that in recent decade, there has been a perception that the New York Police Department has sacrificed the protection of both human rights and civil liberties in order to pursue the established organizational goals. This fact means that the Stop, Question and Frisk practices provided by the New York Police Department remain at the center of the public debate.
Furthermore, the legal standards that govern the Stop, Question and Frisk policy should be taken into consideration. The fact that the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement personnel means that the Stop, Question and Frisk policy is improper. There are legal cases, which demonstrate that the Fourth Amendment works, including Terry v. Ohio case, in which the Court ruled that the proper legal standard should be reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause (Weisburd et al., 2014). Nevertheless, there are also cases, which point out that the police have the right to provide Stop, Question and Frisk practices including the cases like California v. Hodari D. and United States v. Cortes (Weisburd et al., 2014).
Finally, American citizens are not obliged to answer inquires provided by law enforcement personnel. The established constitutional standards exist to provide protection to individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures, if they are not criminals. However, if they are criminals and the police officers have reasonable suspicion that the individuals are involved in criminal activities, the Stop, Question and Frisk policy works. Recent researches are based on the assessment of the effectiveness of the policy in relation to minority and ethnic groups. Thus, the Stop, Question, and Frisk program may be characterized as improper policy as it fosters racial profiling and leads to discrimination toward African Americans and Latinos.
Conclusion
Hence, it is necessary to conclude that the Stop, Question, and Frisk program remains a controversial one, although there is much evidence that it has many positive effects on American society in general and each American citizen in particular. It would be better to make certain improvements in the policy in order to add the force of the constitutional law and allow the police officers to make adequate policy decisions, without racial discrimination and segregation. To achieve a balance between the constitutional rights and the policy duties presents a real challenge for any police officer. This paper discusses not only the controversy about the Stop, Question, and Frisk practices, but also mentions the applicable standards which govern the implementation of the policy. It has been hypothesized that the Stop, Question, and Frisk program fosters racial profiling and leads to discrimination toward African Americans and Latinos. The hypothesis can be accepted as there is much evidence on the negative effects of the Stop, Question, and Frisk practices. It becomes clear that it is necessary to achieve a balance between the constitutional rights and the law enforcement duties. It is recommended to assess the effectiveness of current law enforcement mechanism regarding the implementation of the Stop, Question, and Frisk policy.
Do you like this essay?
Our writers can write a paper like this for you!
(1 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...