Not Enough People of Color Being Profiled Under Controversial Stop- &- Frisk Policy According to NYPD Commissioner
Commissioner Ray Kelly expressed that not enough people of color are being "stopped and frisked" under the controversial NYPD practice. Notoriously known for affecting black and Latino communities the most, (males in particular), a near 90% of people targeted under stop- and- frisk procedure are those of color. Despite the enormous discrepancy in numbers, Mr. Kelly's still not satisfied.
The commissioner's comments regarding the long- time NYPD practice were uttered in response to a recent lawsuit filed against the city and its policing tactics. The Center for Constitutional Rights, (CCR), entered their second class- action lawsuit against the city in early April. The suit was initially filed in 2008, partially based off data compiled by CCR gained via a 1999 lawsuit against the city pertaining to the same issue- the unconstitutionality of stop- and- frisk policy.CCR's first action against the city was taken soon after the infamous shooting of Amadou Diallo. The 22 year old, unarmed, innocent Guinean man who was gunned down by 41 shots in his doorway while pulling out his wallet to identify himself to four surrounding police officers. In the case of of the young immigrant, Diallo payed the highest price for what seemed to be another episode of racial profiling from the New York Police Department. Ultimately the officers involved in the shooting were acquitted of any and all wrong- doing.
Groups like CCR aim to end constitutional violations which lead to abuses of power, which in turn lead to deprivation of freedoms and rights, which then can sometimes lead to innocent people getting killed.
As in the first suit, CCR is representing "anyone who's been illegally stopped in NY in violation of the 4th and 14th Amendments." The 4th Amendment protects against illegal search and seizure, while the 14th not only granted equal citizenship to "former slaves" when it was passed, but it also forbids states from denying any citizen of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." In other words; the state can't just go around harassing and arresting people without probable cause, and they certainly can't selectively rob American citizens of their freedom without damn good reasoning and a fair trial. The biased- orientated stop- and- frisk practice of the NYPD infringes on the rights of many law- abiding citizens. The impact is even worse though when the attitude of the police department breeds contempt, anger, and fear in the communities they're supposed to "protect and serve."
David Floyd, a 33 year old Bronx Medical Student,(also the name attached to the suit, Floyd v. New York), has been victimized twice by police. When asked about the impact NYC policing policies have had on him personally Mr. Floyd stated; "It's a scary thing... You don't what's going to happen with your life, you don't know what's going to happen with your freedom."
Freedom, that thing we hold oh- so- dear. All of us.
![]() |
| NY Times, 1970's NYC |
Brief Lesson in History, And As Always, it Keeps Repeating
In theory, the original implementation of stop- and- frisk seemed a reasonable one. The practice began in the early 70's when crime rates in NYC were astronomical. That era previewed a scene populated by pimps and prostitutes lording over Times Square, junkies and drug dealers openly carrying on in their ways. It was also a time of massive police corruption that seeped into almost every precinct. The economic downturn that contributed to the "seedy apple" in the 70's, and the level of criminality birthed dramatic scandal, but also introduced characters like Frank Serpico, then police officer- turned- whistle- blower.![]() | ||||||||
| - Taken from The Daily Mail; "Gritty 1970's Pictures of NYC" | ||||||||
| Serpico Testifying Against Fellow Officers | ||||||||
Whistle- Blowers; Essential Voices Maintaining Democracy
Stop- and- Frisk Trial Reveals More Unconstitutional NYPD Practices As Exposed by Whistle- Blowers
The recent trial in NY has brought fourth officers who, apparently themselves were fed up with unnecessary expectations placed on them by higher- ups encouraging discriminatory targeting, and the fulfillment of quotas."We were handcuffing kids for no reason," said Officer Adhyl Polanco, one of a handful of cops who have submitted testimony against the department and the city. Polanco even when as far as recording in- precinct meetings which basically validate claims that the department did have a certain number of tickets, summons, and arrests they expected officers to make, and those were to be done in certain neighborhoods, on specific groups of people.
Kelly and other officials have brushed off the claims concerning quotas, (which are entirely illegal), and have stood by stop- and- frisk policy. Mayor Bloomberg has staunchly defended the legality of stop- and- frisk, citing that the disproportionate number of stops on minorities was not about being "politically correct." He even went so far as to imply that critics of the policy were racist themselves, reported by Mother Jones.
Nothing has resulted in the trial as of yet, (well, other than some pretty damning testimony against NYPD), though some predict it's outcome could influence similar policies practiced in other cities and states.
![]() | |
| Source: Mother Jones- Majority of stops lead to drug- related seizures. Weapons such as knives, brass- knuckles, etc are 2nd. Small minority of white people stopped lead in # of seizures that produced drugs or "other" weapons. Vast majority of stops performed on blacks then Hispanics produced the most guns. Given the disproportionate amount of stops executed on people of color, a fair and accurate analysis of this policy is impossible. |
The Stop and Frisk law is not dissimilar from Arizona's SB1070, allowing police to stop anyone they deem to be "suspicious", and even conduct random searches and pat- downs. That's treading on very thin ice, and contributes to the idea of the nation become like a police state. Some say we are already. Me, I'm not sure. It seems we're in a time of great contention. Emerging progressive voices growing louder, calling for social reform. However these voices fall on the willingly deaf ears of system heads, leaving echoes in their wake.
Former NYC Police Commissioner Bill Bratton, an "unapologetic" proponent of stop- and- frisk, and the man responsible for similar policies in other states, has now been taken on as a consultant for public safety in Oakland, California. I would venture to guess there's little doubt that he will encourage the same type of police tactics. Bratton, once referred to as "the father of suppression policing" , is a watched figure by groups like the NAACP and NYCLU.
AAAND YOU'RE OUT!
Another measure adopted by states that has fostered racial stereotyping, and assisted in feeding the US prison population is the 3 strikes law. Washington state was the first to pass such legislation in the early 90's, and by 2003 over half the states had enacted similar measures. The details of the law vary from state- to- state, but the general policy dictates that anyone convicted of 3 major offenses receives a mandatory- minimum sentence of 25 years- to- life in jail. In some states the 3rd offense must be a violent felony, but in others the 3rd offense can be a minor infraction and still land the offender life in prison.The law certainly has its place when applied to repeat violent offenders and sexual deviants, but as critics point out often times the sentences handed down to others are disproportionate to the crime(s) that were committed.
California was notorious for their 3rd strike policy, but the state has changed its tune somewhat with the passage of Prop 36, which has made it so the 3rd offense must be a violent felony. Unfortunately this won't help people like Curtis Wilkerson who was sentenced to 25- to- life before the recent passing of Prop 36. In an article entitled, "Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Shame of Three Strikes Laws" by RollingStone magazine, Wilkerson recalls his story from prison of being sent away 18 years ago for stealing a pair of socks that cost $2.50. Wilkerson is one of many examples of the disparities in sentencing and racial inequality that opponents of 3 strikes laws use as ammunition for the reform of our criminal justice system. Non- profits like The Sentencing Project are a good place to start to learn more about needed transformation in the way America conducts its business of crime and punishment.
Policies like stop- and- frisk, 3 strike laws, mandatory minimums contribute to these negatively distorted, cookie- cutter expectations society has placed on poorer Americans and citizens of color. What's more chilling; these policies help sustain the supply of Americans needed for the prison industrial complex.
Recent, Related Story-
79 LAPD Officers Break- Up Predominantly Black USC Graduation Party, While Ignoring Mostly White Party Across The Street- ABC Report





