Pros And Cons Of Stop And Frisk

780 Words4 Pages
The act of “Stop and Frisk” began in the early 1900’s when crime rates began to escalate in major cities such as New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia. Stop, question, and frisk, or SQF, is an urban policing measure that involves the large-scale deployment of officers in public spaces (e.g., sidewalks, alleys, the communal outdoor spaces of public housing) tasked with conducting frequent investigative stops (Huq, A. Z. (2017). In the articles provided, it is questioned whether New York’s stop and frisk policy is constitutional or not. I agree with the court's ruling, I believe Judge Scheindlin seemed too involved. “Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, the appeals court said, jeopardized "the appearance of partiality ... by a series of media interviews and public statements purporting to respond publicly to criticism of the District Court”…show more content…
The safety of the community is crucial and attempting to deam stop and frisk as unconstitutional limits law enforcement. There is much controversy on how it can target a certain group or race but I believe the goal of any police is to deter crime when implementing stop and frisk. I believe stop and frisk can help reduce crimes and eliminate potential crime in a city, neighborhood, or street. Boyette, C., & Martinez, M. (2013). Court blocks ruling against NYPD's stop-and-frisk policy. Retrieved from BELLIN, J. (2014). THE INVERSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CONSTITUTIONALITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF NEW YORK CITY "STOP AND FRISK". Boston University Law Review, 94(5), 1495-1550. Young, J. (2016). Cruel winter: Chicago police blame murder spike on 'ACLU effect'. Retrieved from Huq, A. Z. (2017). The Consequences of Disparate Policing: Evaluating Stop and Frisk as a Modality of Urban Policing. Minnesota Law Review, 101(6),

More about Pros And Cons Of Stop And Frisk

Open Document