NYPD stop & frisk statistics (2009)

[slip969]

Correlation does not imply causation. I think most in NYC regardless of race would agree that most street crime is performed by non-whites. On the flip side, some of the most heinous crimes in history have taken place downtown in the Financial District. The difference is the latter is rarely prosecuted.

This is more of a class issue than race. I'd venture to say that these days at least half of new police officers are nonwhite.

That is because most of the time it requires intelligence to commit "heinous crimes".

[willid46]

Caucasian white collar criminals own the media, the U.S. government, and make the our laws so does anybody in their right minds think that they would out themselves? Street crime averages about $2 million dollars a year, compared to $20 billion dollars a year committed by the white collar criminals of Wall Street.

[Faldur]

Well Blacks are 8 times more likely than whites to commit a crime, Hispanics are 3 times more likely. The police know these statistics, really no mystery or racism.

When they start stopping asians, we have a problem. Whites are 4 times more likely to commit a crime than an asian. (Lack of driving skills excluded)

[flabbybody]

sounds like you just made up those stats

[DaveinBoston]

Hey Flabbybody and all other perpetuating racial differences... I didnt read anything in the study that said what the race or sex of the officers doing the "stop and frisk".

The study in itself is biased without that data. You and everyone else are assuming that the stops of minorities (african-american, hispanic etc) were done by a white male. It does sort of address the fact that different precincts have more minorities in them... Im guessing there arent a lot of stop and frisks done on Wall Street.... but it doesnt say they were excluded either. That would skew the stats.

Also, lets get back to the "white male" aspect. What if the stop was done by an afican american male on an african american male. Is that racial profiling... or would you say "no"?

How would you factor in a female officer? In my opinion, a female officer is going to frisk more people because of a higher perceived threat level. Im not saying a female is any less brave, only that walking into a group of males is going to set anyones threat level up...

[DaveinBoston]

I forgot to add... that ITS NOT ROUTINE is ALL American cities. This article is a study of NYPD. Not Boston, LA, Miami or anywhere else. I have friends who work in those cities (except LA) and that is not a "common practice".

stop and frisks occur when cops question citizens who have done nothing outwardly suspicious to warrent police attention. Its routine LE proceedure in all American cities and happens every minute of the day, 24/7

89% of citizens stopped by police in NYC for stop and frisks were nonwhites (black and hispanic/latina)
per US census, nonwhites accounted for only about 50% of New York City's population.

yea, we gotta black president but we still have a ways to go as far as race is concerned

http://www.rand.org/pubs/testimonies...RAND_CT329.pdf

[flabbybody]

we're talking about internal policy of NYPD
I wonder how much individual discretion police officers have when it comes to stop and frisk

you brought up a valid point

[Faldur]

sounds like you just made up those stats

Never, facts don't lie nor show prejudice. The statistics I quoted were pulled from the "Race, Crime and Justice in America. The Color of Crime" full report available here: http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf

Or use the U.S. Dept of Justice, "Bureau of Justice Statistics".
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict_v.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

[frank]

If a cop asked to frisk me with out just cause in Hawaii I would tell him to read the constitution.

How is this legal anywhere in the US?

FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'

[DaveinBoston]

Law enforcement officers can engage anyone they want in a normal discussion. Hi... how are you? Anything like that. It does not give them the right to search you.

There is a gray area that cases have been made over when and officer shows up someplace... in a normal routine and a person takes off running.... or acts suspiciously. If the officer fears for their safety, they can "pat frisk" someone.... but there has been evidence thrown out because a "pat frisk" lead to finding drugs say in a box of cigarettes. How can an officer justify he felt a box in the persons pants and feared a box of butts?

If it's not a lawful search, yes, the person might get arrested but everything found is thrown out... no matter what it is. Its called the fruit of the poison tree.

If a cop asked to frisk me with out just cause in Hawaii I would tell him to read the constitution.

How is this legal anywhere in the US?

FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'