By: Cierra Hart and Keshun Thach
October 11, 2016; 11:24 am
When it comes to crime, there’s a lot of debate about privacy, and the debate doesn’t stop when it comes to “Stop and Frisk”. “Stop and Frisk” started around the 1990s. “Stop and Frisk” is when police are able to stop you for any given reason and pat you down for drugs or weapons. It has reduced crime rates.
The presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, had a debate about it. Trump believes that its a great idea and should be brought back around the country, while Clinton believes that it’s unconstitutional.
We’ve decided to go around the school and ask people what they think of this topic. Even though there are some people that support “Stop and Frisk”, like Trump, Giuliani, and the New York Police Department, there are a lot of people that are on Clinton’s side. Yet, a lot of people are on Clinton’s side due to the belief that this is an invasion of privacy. Like Mrs. Jager said “I think it’s an invasion of privacy”. People have arguments about how “Stop and Frisk” goes against the First Amendment, but the First Amendment says nothing about privacy. It does go against the Fourth Amendment, which states that your home and person cannot be searched without a warrant. While doing our research, we didn’t find anyone that is on Trump’s side.
People also believe that “Stop and Frisk” is discriminatory. We did some research, and the NYCLU says that in 2002, New Yorkers were stopped by police 97,296 times, 87% were totally innocent, 54% were blacks, 31% were latinos, and 12% were whites. Then a couple years later in 2015, people were stopped 22,939 times, 80% were innocent, 54% were blacks, 29% were latinos, and 11% were whites. So as you can see there is a bit of discriminatory manner.
After doing all this research about this topic, I still have a question; how is “Stop and Frisk” going to make people trust the police?
If you want to find out more about this topic, check out these links.