Stop And Frisk
Stop and Frisk page2
Abstract
This paper was written to take a look at both sides of the stop and frisk program. By examining both sides I hope to show the effectiveness of the program, but not to leave out the possible negative effects also. There is no doubt that this program has gain a lot of negative attention, the main controversial issue at hand is that the people feel that it gives the cops to much authority to stop anyone they can. This program is to believe that it is a way to make cities more safe, but the ones’ that are mostly stopped are African-American and Latino young men and they feel that the program is a way for the cops to use it for racial profiling. Not only is it used for profiling, but these people believe …show more content…
The actual frisk part did not exist unless buy on two occasions, one occasion, if there was a weapon suspected, and if there were suspicion of possible crime escalating to probable cause of arrest, those were the only reason then you could frisk someone (Naspretto). In Ernie Naspretto’s article, The Real History of Stop and Frisk Erine talks about how he really can see how both good and bad can come from this policy, but also how it was important to do the paper work that is involved with each stop and frisk situation, the paper work was the only mean of showing that the police were doing their job. Naspretto believed that the policy was working crime was down, but he also thinks that the stop and frisk as gotten more aggressive over time.
Stop and Frisk page 4 In my opinion, I think Naspretto’s last commit was really about how racial the stop and frisk has gotten, but first before I jump on the racial wagon, I would like to break the stop and frisk …show more content…
The program is aim to get guns off the streets, to gather information that would help solve criminal activity, but most important be an deterrent by showing anyone that maybe thinking of interacting with anything that is illegal, will be subject to a frisk. There has been a lot of attention on how this program is said to be singling out a certain group of people, but the fact is, the crime rate is and will always be high in low income neighborhoods and the people that make up these neighborhoods are African Americans and Latino’s. You have people like Judge Scheindlin that believes that the program is discriminatory and that is a violation of the Fourth and the Fourteenth Amendment. But in the articles I have read where the person being interviewed were either retired NYPD officers or officers still on the force, their thoughts on the program were that the raciest card has been over played and people need to get over it. To help better understand how people are thinking about the role of police, one can go back to when Lyndon Johnson addressed the problem of crime, his recommendations on the problem were calling for elimination of social conditions that were closely associated with crime he suggested the
Abstract
This paper was written to take a look at both sides of the stop and frisk program. By examining both sides I hope to show the effectiveness of the program, but not to leave out the possible negative effects also. There is no doubt that this program has gain a lot of negative attention, the main controversial issue at hand is that the people feel that it gives the cops to much authority to stop anyone they can. This program is to believe that it is a way to make cities more safe, but the ones’ that are mostly stopped are African-American and Latino young men and they feel that the program is a way for the cops to use it for racial profiling. Not only is it used for profiling, but these people believe …show more content…
The actual frisk part did not exist unless buy on two occasions, one occasion, if there was a weapon suspected, and if there were suspicion of possible crime escalating to probable cause of arrest, those were the only reason then you could frisk someone (Naspretto). In Ernie Naspretto’s article, The Real History of Stop and Frisk Erine talks about how he really can see how both good and bad can come from this policy, but also how it was important to do the paper work that is involved with each stop and frisk situation, the paper work was the only mean of showing that the police were doing their job. Naspretto believed that the policy was working crime was down, but he also thinks that the stop and frisk as gotten more aggressive over time.
Stop and Frisk page 4 In my opinion, I think Naspretto’s last commit was really about how racial the stop and frisk has gotten, but first before I jump on the racial wagon, I would like to break the stop and frisk …show more content…
The program is aim to get guns off the streets, to gather information that would help solve criminal activity, but most important be an deterrent by showing anyone that maybe thinking of interacting with anything that is illegal, will be subject to a frisk. There has been a lot of attention on how this program is said to be singling out a certain group of people, but the fact is, the crime rate is and will always be high in low income neighborhoods and the people that make up these neighborhoods are African Americans and Latino’s. You have people like Judge Scheindlin that believes that the program is discriminatory and that is a violation of the Fourth and the Fourteenth Amendment. But in the articles I have read where the person being interviewed were either retired NYPD officers or officers still on the force, their thoughts on the program were that the raciest card has been over played and people need to get over it. To help better understand how people are thinking about the role of police, one can go back to when Lyndon Johnson addressed the problem of crime, his recommendations on the problem were calling for elimination of social conditions that were closely associated with crime he suggested the