Stop and frisk
Stop and Frisk’s Dilemma
Hannah Anis
Business 28A 81110
Professor A. Chen
November 25, 2014
A dominant group of research has shown that the stop-and -frisk has brought a huge issue regarding racial profiling (Alpert, Dunham, & Smith, 2007). Specifically, African American and Latino New Yorkers were overwhelmingly targeted for stop-and-frisk activity (Stop-and-Frisk, 2011). The activity of stop-and-frisk is an action that any police officer can partake in whenever they feel like they have the factor of doing so. Meaning that it is their initiative whether they would stop an individual or not (Avdija A.S., 2014). Some of the factors that trigger the initiation are: closeness to the crime scene, high crime area, and suspicious behavior (Lippman 2013; Ridgeway, 2007). Since not all the factors in the procedure of stop-and-frisk do not show a specific possibility of racial discrimination, the majority should not think that this procedure is harmful to anyone. It is certain that races relate with the number of police stops, but it should be known that there is another factor in performing this action other than race. All should consider age and gender which are two factors that also create an enormous influence on the officers’ initiative (Schafer, Carter, Katz-Bannister, & Wells, 2006). Therefore, the author hypothesizes that the police stop-and-frisk procedure serves as a great tactic for many police officers to lessen the crime rate and to be more aware of any danger that may harm people. Stop-and-frisk should be seen by many as a form of protection rather than a form of discrimination. However, the police officer who is responsible for taking this action must act in a way that a legal requirement is still being executed. The paper then discusses the decline of the crime rate due to the stop-and-frisk procedure, specifically in New York City. It then discusses the erroneous use of stop-and-frisk, as well as expressing how Fourth Amendment correlates with
Hannah Anis
Business 28A 81110
Professor A. Chen
November 25, 2014
A dominant group of research has shown that the stop-and -frisk has brought a huge issue regarding racial profiling (Alpert, Dunham, & Smith, 2007). Specifically, African American and Latino New Yorkers were overwhelmingly targeted for stop-and-frisk activity (Stop-and-Frisk, 2011). The activity of stop-and-frisk is an action that any police officer can partake in whenever they feel like they have the factor of doing so. Meaning that it is their initiative whether they would stop an individual or not (Avdija A.S., 2014). Some of the factors that trigger the initiation are: closeness to the crime scene, high crime area, and suspicious behavior (Lippman 2013; Ridgeway, 2007). Since not all the factors in the procedure of stop-and-frisk do not show a specific possibility of racial discrimination, the majority should not think that this procedure is harmful to anyone. It is certain that races relate with the number of police stops, but it should be known that there is another factor in performing this action other than race. All should consider age and gender which are two factors that also create an enormous influence on the officers’ initiative (Schafer, Carter, Katz-Bannister, & Wells, 2006). Therefore, the author hypothesizes that the police stop-and-frisk procedure serves as a great tactic for many police officers to lessen the crime rate and to be more aware of any danger that may harm people. Stop-and-frisk should be seen by many as a form of protection rather than a form of discrimination. However, the police officer who is responsible for taking this action must act in a way that a legal requirement is still being executed. The paper then discusses the decline of the crime rate due to the stop-and-frisk procedure, specifically in New York City. It then discusses the erroneous use of stop-and-frisk, as well as expressing how Fourth Amendment correlates with