NYPD Stop, Question, and Frisk Policy Term Paper

NYPD Stop, Question, and Frisk Policy - Term Paper modeling.. found that the stops were not actually finding or preventing abhorrences. 97% percent of stops resulted in no conviction at all, although they did still utilize city time and resources to reach those outcomes. (Clark, Meredith Reports Find Stop-and-Frisk Does not Cut Crime). Reports also say that the policy has only served to fuel racial divergence charges as those stopped are supposedly mostly black and Latino men. A move that according to most, constitutes the violation of a persons constitutional rights. The American public has their right to privacy and has quite strict rules regarding racial discrimination across the country. The spic-and-span York Stop-and-Frisk policy has chosen to ignore the constitutionally and legally protected rights of the New York citizens in an effort to keep peace within their borders. With an average of 88 percent of stop and frisks resulting in the plough of those being stopped wit hout issuing a ticket or resulting in an arrest (NY Stop and Frisk Policy Violates nonage Rights, US Constitution - calculate) , this policy should be seen as nothing but merely a nuisance. Evidence of this constitutional rights violation can be seen in the annals of the New York Attorney Generals situation as far back as 1999 when it was discovered that Black and Latino New Yorkers were stopped at far higher rates than white men and women (NY Stop and Frisk Policy Violates Minority Rights, US Constitution - Judge). much(prenominal) acts can be deemed as racial profiling which is a direct violation of the united States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution declares that mess shall be protected from unreasonable searches. Yet in the enjoin of New York, under the Stop-and-Frisk policy, at least 200,000 stops were made without reasonable suspicion from the year 2002 - 2004. Such a high rate of stops overall makes it quite evident that that there is no crime taking place and that the people being stopped were not in any way playacting in a suspicious manner (Hanna, Jason Judge Rules NYCs Stop-and-Frisk Policy Unconstitutional City Vows Appeal). Over the prehistorical decade, a total of 5 million stops have occurred involving mostly Black and Hispanic men. The New York Stop-and-Frisk Policy is nothing more than a violation of ones right to privacy according to some people who have been involved in the implementation of the policy. Under the 14th Amendment people, regardless of gender, race, and ethnicity are also protected and given the equal protection of the law (Adelmann, Bob Judge Rules New York Citys Stop and Frisk Policy Unconstitutional). This amendment in particular is violated by the stop-and-frisk policy because of the conscious decision of the police force to concentrate their operations on the members of the black, Latino, and Hispanic communities. Due to the existence of the stop-and-frisk policy, New Yorkers are gripped with fear that they can be get the picture on the streets for no apparent reason. It has led people to fear a police state advent into existence in New York City. This is a policy that must be brought to an end because The NYPDs practice of devising stops that lack individualized reasonable suspicion has been so pervasive and persistent as to expire not only a part of the NYPDs standard operating procedure, but a fact of day-to-day life