Truths about stop-and-frisk
On Monday a judge ruled that stop-and-frisk in the city of New York is unconstitutional. In which NYPD officers are using stop-and-frisk as an excuse to racially profile young minorities in the city. Finally someone that can do something about sees how unconstitutional stop-and-frisk really is. New Yorkers, especially minorities who were primarily the targets of stop-and-frisk can again walk the streets of New York without worrying about a police officer or detective randomly stopping them and frisking them for no apparent reason. The truth is, stop-and-frisk should have never been something police officers can do. Many New Yorkers are unclear as to what this actually means. U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin says that stop-and-frisk is not going to end but she wants it to be known that stop-and-frisk should be carried out in a manner in which the liberties and rights of all New Yorkers are protected but still providing police protection. The fact that police officers were targeting young minorities is appalling but I’m sure stop-and-frisk was happening every day and all the time. While I agree the streets of New York have to be protected but I disagree that aggressive stop-and-frisk is the way to do it.
Who started stop-and-frisk?
Now, we might ask ourselves who thought that stop-and-frisk was a good idea in the first place? The mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg who has come up with all sorts of laws that most people feel are unconstitutional. It didn’t come to a surprise to most New Yorkers that stop-and-frisk was happening; because it’s been happening for decades, they were more surprised that stop-and-frisk was actually allowed in this manner. The mayor came out and said he felt that stop-and-frisk did not receive a fair trial. Is it fair that stop-and-frisk targeted mainly young minorities, is that not considered racial profiling? He stated that stop-and-frisk helped bring the crime rate in NYC to an all time low. Mr. Bloomberg feels that if stop-and-frisk does cease to exist that the city’s crime rate will rise once again. While I agree, I don’t feel like stop-and-frisk should only be targeted to young minorities. Mr. Bloomberg will be out of office at years end after serving three terms, will this be the end of stop-and-frisk or at least the NYPD will be more fair as to who they target while practicing stop-and-frisk.
The future for stop-and-frisk
What does the future hold for stop-and-frisk? There are many opinions as to what the future should be for stop-and-frisk. NYPD officers should wear on body cameras to monitor their activities while performing a stop-and-frisk. This will determine if the officers are taking the necessary steps or procedures while conducting a stop-and-frisk. Personally, I think this Is a great idea, it will show if police officers are really targeting minorities for stop-and-frisk. Another viable option they may have when performing stop-and-frisk is to use contact cards to document the interactions. Using these contact cards as used in Chicago will not only keep stop-and-frisk alive but will make it much more maintainable and limit racial profiling. NYPD has to have some type of training for its officers to make sure they are taking the right procedures while performing a stop-and-frisk. I certainly agree the streets of New York do have to be safe but when it comes to officers violating citizen’s rights while performing stop-and-frisk, that’s when it becomes a problem. There is a positive future but it’s up to the officers to correctly perform stop-and-frisk.