The entire idea of “stop and frisk” is that the police have no idea whether they a
are committing crimes or not beforehand. But if you stop more minorities than Whites in proportion to the population. even if the same number of crimes are being committed. Blacks will still be convicted more.
More evidence that Whites are less likely to get tickets for the same offense.
Hmm--that doesn't match my impression. Rather, police would presumably stop and frisk people they pattern-matched as up to no good. (Popular niceties notwithstanding, police generally know the score.) If some group is committing a disproportionate number of crimes, it's entirely reasonable that they'd be stopped more.
I want my police to skillfully work on the crime problem, not carefully spend equal minutes on each demographic group.
But it turns out that the New York Daily News was wrong about its forecasts, which the media outlet’s editorial board wrote in an op-ed Monday that it was “delighted” to admit. Instead of bedlam up in Brooklyn and hell up in Harlem, as the paper had warned would happen as a result of scaling back “stop and frisk,” the opposite happened: “Post stop-and-frisk, the facts are clear,” wrote the editorial board Monday. “New York is safer while friction between the NYPD and the city’s minority communities has eased.
reply