Stop and Frisk
Police Officers work for many hours and most of those hours are stopping people on the street to see what they carry. Stop and frisk is “One of the most controversial police procedures is the stop and frisk search. This type of limited search occurs when police confront a suspicious person in an effort to prevent a crime from taking place. The police frisk (pat down) the person for weapons and question the person,” (Farlex, 2008, pg. 1). How stop and frisk became the system used by police officers was “After Terry this type of police encounter became known as a ‘Terry stop’ or an ‘investigatory detention.’ Police may stop and question suspicious persons, pat them down for weapons, and even subject them to nonintrusive search procedures such as the use of metal detectors and drug-sniffing dogs. While a suspect is detained, a computer search can be performed to see if the suspect is wanted for crimes. If so, he or she may be arrested and searched incident to that arrest,” (Farlex, 2008, pg. 2) This case was called Terry vs. Ohio. There was anonymous caller to police who indicated that there were two males walking who were carrying a weapon. This phone call was verified. This concluded with the reasonable for suspicion to stop these men who were carrying a weapon known as “Terry stop” as well as stop and frisk. These police officers are only supposed to use stop and frisk when they see someone who is walking around with a weapon, but in our society today, police officers are actually stopping people who have drugs on them. The people who are being stopped are mostly Blacks and Hispanics. These stops are being unfair and judgmental. A stop is not an arrest but could lead into one, if the suspicious person that is stopped has something illegal or committing a crime. According to The People’s Law Dictionary, the “Supreme Court noted that stops and frisks are considerably less intrusive than full-blown arrests and searches. It also observed that the interests in crime prevention and in police safety require that the police have some leeway to act before full probable cause has developed. The Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement is sufficiently flexible to permit an officer to investigate the situation,” (Farlex, 2008, pg. 1) Even though the Supreme Court believes that stop and frisk is helping society, there are actually flaws with this system. Many people are being stopped and frisked aggressively and have been stopped for no reason, which the many of the people that are being stopped, do not know their own rights that they can use toward the police officer, so he/she do not have to be patted down. There has to be some solution to this issue, so that these people know what to do when they are stopped by the police. This essay will cover the solution that could happen, but one of biggest issue regarding stop and frisk in New York that will be stated in this essay is that it has been discriminatory toward race and class. Literature Review
On November 14, 2013, there was a press release about people who took a survey regarding NYPD doing stop and frisk. Many people who took the survey said that they were discriminated by NYPD when they were stopped and frisked. Discrimination has been a problem under the Bloomberg’s administration. NYCLU (New York Civil Liberties Union) Executive Director Donna Lieberman said “People of color have borne an outsize burden of this injustice, but it impacts every New Yorker and the safety of the city as a whole when entire communities are afraid of the very police force that is supposed to protect them. It is time to transform the culture of the NYPD, from one of heavy handed disrespect for some to one of dignity, respect and accountability for all, so that every New Yorker is treated fairly and all feel safe, secure, respected and protected,” (“NYCLU,” 2013, pg. 1) Many people who come from different races try to hide themselves or run away from NYPD...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document