Name: Bisi Alade Date: November 25th, 2015 Article 1 Nahal Zamani. “The Human Impact.” (July 2012): 1-33. Web http://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/08/the-human-impact-report.pdf Center for Constitutional Right is a non-profit legal advocacy organization, affiliated with New York City, around for 49 years; co-founded in 1966 by William Kunstler. Nahal Zamani led the research effort, conducted and compiled the interview, nurtured community connections, and wrote the first draft of the report. Nahal Zamani is an Advocacy Program Manager at the Center for Constitutional Rights, where she directs CCR’s advocacy and campaigns challenging the NYPD’s abusive stop and frisk practices and other discriminatory policing practices, …show more content…
This research showcases and supports my thesis. The methods used in this article provides a framework for readers to think and look beyond what they are blinded to in society. The articles helps my thesis to show that stop and frisk is unlawful and unjustified and has affected the daily lives of innocent people. For this article to be strong in my research paper I will need a counter argument so my research is not biased and emotional. Quotes: “In our landmark, class-action lawsuit, CCR challenged the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices. The court found racial discrimination and 4th Amendment violations, ordering a reform process that includes input from affected communities” Explanation of how people are affected: A wide range of communities in our society have learned to live in fear of police and a generation of children of color have grown up in an environment where being mistreated by police is an expected part of daily life. Description of occurrence while stop and frisk occurs: Several interviewees reported that stops often result in excessive force by police, describing instances when officers slapped them, threw them up against walls or onto the ground, beat them up, used a Taser on them, or otherwise hurt them physically. Many of the testimonies CCR heard illustrate that this force is often used indiscriminately, or in response to being asked the reason for a stop or an …show more content…
I had bruises on my face. My whole face was swollen. I was sent to the precinct for disorderly conduct. I got out two days later. The charges were dismissed. At central booking, they threw out the charge. No charge. I felt like I couldn’t defend myself, didn’t know what to do. No witnesses there to see what was going on. I just wish someone was there to witness it. I felt like no one would believe me. I couldn’t tell anyone. I kept it in till now... I still am scared. Definition of stop and frisk: “Stop and frisk” is the police practice of temporarily detaining people on the street, questioning them, and possibly also frisking or searching them. Under the law, an officer may not stop a person without having a reasonable suspicion that the individual. Persona used to target minorities: The form lists several possible reasons for the stop that officers check off", including “Fits Description,” “Furtive Movements,” “Suspicious Bulge/Object,” “Wearing Clothes/Disguises Commonly Used in Commission of Crime,” “Sights and Sounds of Criminal Activity,” and “Area Has High Incidence of Reported O"ense of Type Under Investigation” (high-crime area). Information gathered stating how there is injustice with this statue: “In a historic ruling on August 12, 2013, following a nine-week trial, a federal judge found the New York City Police Department liable for a pattern and practice of racial profiling and unconstitutional
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
New York Police Officers feel no commitment in having to treat any black or Hispanic with respect because of their race. The generic debate made by Bob Herbert in his work, Jim Crow Policing, is that stops are a representation of cops being racist and harassers as well. More precisely Herbert feuds that racial profiling has become a tool of harassment. Herbert states, “Rather than a legitimate crime-fighting tool, these stops are a despicable racially oriented tool of harassment”(NY Times Herbert). In the passage, Herbert is specifying that blacks and Hispanics were commonly stopped and frisked for their race.
Terry v. Ohio or “Stop and Frisk” or “Terry Stop” or “Pat Down”, how about we call it the “McFadden”. There are tens of thousands of people that do not really care what we call it. Maybe, we name it after one of them? However, the Supreme Court’s monumental case law, “Terry v. Ohio”, has saved tens of thousands of lives. Furthermore, this court ruling has aided the law enforcement with their first priority, which is “protect”, moreover, this ruling has aided with the second priority, which is “serve”.
The preventative landscape of Stop and Frisk is reinforced by Terry v. Ohio, has allotted police officers the authority that a person could be seized based on a reasonable suspicion that the suspect was involved in serious criminal conduct. However when applied to N.Y., empirical evidence regarding both the factors for and outcomes of stops and frisks in New York demonstrates that either the legal standard is too permissive or police-stop documentation is not truthful (Rudovsky). Stop and Frisk allows a great amount of power to officers to determine reasonable doubt which encompasses all criminal activity, no matter how trivial. The power provided to law enforcement to put into practice Stop and Frisk, allowing for more discretion in combating crime. While it does also set the tone for the abuse and misappropriation of stops, as “reasonable doubt” is a more
Stop and Frisk has been a controversial issue since it was first enacted in 1964. Stop and Frisk is a officer protection procedure where a person is stopped for what the officer deems "reasonably suspicious" and then if needed the officer will frisk the person for weapons. The part that has been deemed controversial and what had many departments in hot water was the fact that many of the citizens were being stopped solely on their race and because they were in a bad part of town. Former Mayor Bloomberg of New York City rejected the idea of the courts when they declared stop and frisk as unconstitutional. He accused the judge of not giving the city a fair trial and said they would appeal the ruling so that they could allow the current stop and frisk procedures to continue.
Describe one argument that supports “stop and frisk” policies. One argument that supports “stop and frisk” is the protection of the law enforcement and the community (Ivers, 2013). Ivers mention, “Chief Justice Earl Warren made clear that the "stop and frisk" exception was based on the need to protect police officers from criminal suspects carrying weapons” (2013). If there’s probable cause to stop a citizen, law enforcement should make sure the citizen they have stopped is not going to cause them bodily harm.
Nclive, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10892-010-9091-x. Paul Bou-Habib of the Department of Government at the University of Essex in the United Kingdom, presents this paper as a discussion of what he terms “background injustice” and racial profiling. He basically defines “background injustices”as social injustices over which the individual has no control within his profiled group. Bou-Habib suggests two accounts of background injustice. First is “responsible injustice”wherein the group proposing racial profiling is responsible for the injustice.
The Iron Triangle has impacted Racial Discrimination “American is Free Country” I thought that saying was true for the longest time but maybe that is only because I am white. I am free against discrimination and racial profiling. I am free to walk into stores, and not have eyes staring at me, making sure I am not stealing. I am free to sit on a plane and no one suspect me as terrorist.
They looked up my record, I immediately got arrested, don't even get read my rights...
Stop and Frisk Stop and Frisk, the tactic that has been going on for only for short time, yet there seems to be racial tension already. But is this new information actually true or is it just good policing? According to Heather Mac Donald from the Manhattan Institute, says “what looks like racial profiling might just be good policing”. However according to Ranjana Natarajan from the Washington post “it’s clear that two issues need to be addressed: racial profiling and police use of excessive force.” Unfortunately we cannot have both ways.
Throughout history, disputes and tensions between law enforcement officials and communities of minorities have endured hostility and violence between each other. Racial profiling has become a “hot topic” for researchers as well as for politicians and by now it is likely that most citizens are at least aware of the common accusations of racial bias pitted against law enforcement (Cochran & Warren, 2013). Communities of color are being discriminated against and racially profiled by white police officers for any suspicion of criminal activities. It has been widely assumed by policy makers and citizens alike that allegations of racial profiling are mostly associated with the policing practices of white officers and their treatment of racial and ethnic minorities (Cochran & Warren, 2013). Also, individuals of minority descent will certainly recognize that they are being racially profiled during a stop that is being conducted by a white police officer.
Not to mention all the undocumented people that feel oppressed by officers and scared to talk back to them with a “no”. In chapter two, the author presents a section titled Just Say No. In this section the author illustrates a time where two police officers stopped a bus to search for drugs. Police officers never warned individuals that they had the right to remain silent and, therefore, minorities were trapped and found guilty for carrying drugs. In addition, the book discusses the Florida vs Botsick case that states that people have the right to refuse answering the police.
There has been many controversial issues about the “stop-and-frisk” law. One side believes that it is racially profiling the communities of minorities and the other side believes that it is helping communities rise away from violence. There is a lot of history and background on stop-and-frisk and how it originated in the United States, especially in different places around the world. This law has been very controversial even within the law itself, so controversial states are debating on getting rid of it completely. Many politicians speak on this tactic in both positive and negative ways and the statistical growths and decreases on this topic.
The source has limitations because it strictly gives the background of the history of policing strategies to reducing crime. Jeffrey Rosen uses former Mayor Giuliani’s quotes and worked closely with transit-police authority. I would be able to use quotes from this article because it relates to my topic, being in New York and dealing with stop and frisk. My final questions for Rosen would include, why did he not mention more about these policing strategies tie in with Supreme Court cases? Did the Supreme Court tell former Mayor Giuliani to get a more strict policing policy to increase the UF-250 forms?