Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
88% of the 4.4 million stops were of people doing absolutely nothing wrong. In 83% of cases, the person stopped was black or Hispanic. Young black and Latino men only count for 4.7% of NYC's population. That's hardcore profiling. And those arrests lead to nothing.
In fact, when expanded to New York state wide, it was found that [only one in 16 arrests that resulted from Stop and Frisk served any significant jail time](New analysis shows just how ineffective stop-and-frisk has been | MSNBC). Only one out of every 1000 stop and frisks resulted in a weapons charge or led to a violent crime conviction. 25% were dismissed outright prior to arraignment or were considered non-criminal charges.
In short: Juries and judges tended to side towards privacy. Communities were outraged at the poor targeting of the program, with the above 'hit rates' considered very poor. And a federal monitor was called in to oversee sweeping reforms to the police department’s policy in NY.
In fact, when expanded to New York state wide, it was found that [only one in 16 arrests that resulted from Stop and Frisk served any significant jail time](New analysis shows just how ineffective stop-and-frisk has been | MSNBC). Only one out of every 1000 stop and frisks resulted in a weapons charge or led to a violent crime conviction. 25% were dismissed outright prior to arraignment or were considered non-criminal charges.
In short: Juries and judges tended to side towards privacy. Communities were outraged at the poor targeting of the program, with the above 'hit rates' considered very poor. And a federal monitor was called in to oversee sweeping reforms to the police department’s policy in NY.
Why do I have a hard time believing this ? There is no way that it can't work, if S&F targeted some of the most violent areas in Detroit, for instance. A period of a year is all it would take.
They reduced crime before this tactic was implemented. They reduced crime after this tactic was shelved. Why would you think the crime reduction that happened while cops were using S&F was due to that tactic?
IIRC, some can document crime started to drop as a result of getting the lead out. Especially in urban areas.
You can get angry with your kid for not doing his homework , does NOT mean you hate him for not dong it.
The kind of anger that comes from a kid not doing his homework is different from the kind of anger you have when someone advocates for violating your civil liberties because you're of a certain race.
This is just my opinion. Those who tout how "great" S&F is willfully ignore that NYC's crime rate would have dropped without it. It started dropping without it. Some people willfully ignore it to cover up for something else: WHO gets stopped and frisked. Alot of people know that the ones who will be targeted are going to be Black and Hispanic males. This is music to some people's ears. In my opinion, the main attitude of "we feel safer is Blacks and Hispanics are subjected to a police state that only affects THEM". I understand some people do not care about my safety or my freedom. They're looking out for themselves. This is why I continue to hold strong to my stance AGAINST Stop and Frisk. The individuals who support Stop and Frisk are out for themselves, so I must look out for my safety and freedom.
Yep. I could right a paper on how a big factor in Conservatives slipping further towards fascism is rooted in their need to keep up policies that disenfranchised minorities, particularly Blacks & Browns. It's hard to not be a police-state supporter when you defend it violating the rights of certain classes of citizens. And when those roosters came home to roost, Conservatives had the choice between reversing their past support, which would out the racist motivations behind it, or go all in on their jack-boot thuggery to continue targeting minorities. We know which option they chose.
Ironically, these same classy Conservatives actually went for option A when it came to drug enforcement and sentencing policy. Once the face of drug use stopped being Black crack addicts and blunt smokers in urban centers, and become Momma Opioid in the Boonies, suddenly Conservative America started caring about treating the addiction instead of just locking up offenders. Suddenly, victimless drug use stopped being something to punish people for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
