NYPD Chief Says Ending Stop And Frisk Will 'Hurt Minorities,' Result In A Surge Of Criminal Activity
from the wrong-on-both-counts dept
We've all heard Bloomberg's defense of the NYPD's officially unconstitutional stop and frisk program. Basically, the mayor claims that without being able to harass thousands of minorities a year (88% of whom are never charged, detained or given a summons), the city will immediately fall prey to a crimewave of epic proportions.
In fact, the hint of any sort of regulation or oversight is also greeted by the mayor's proclamations that, if implemented, the streets will run red with the blood of the innocent (also: cops). According to Bloomberg, any additional layer of oversight will so severely impair the decision-making skills of his police force, they'll be unable to respond to a pulled gun with anything other than dying.
So, now we'll have another layer of monitors... You're a police officer. You have to know what orders to follow. If somebody pulls a gun and you WANT TO GET HOME, you don't have time to say, "Well, now wait a second, the commissioner said one thing, the monitor said another and the IG said another." By that time, you're dead.Fortunately, Bloomberg will be leaving office soon and won't have to bear the burden of a "bunch of people dying" (his words) as a result of this recent court decision. On the other hand, Police Chief Ray Kelly may be around long enough to see his stop and frisk program hampered by oversight and the Constitution, provided he doesn't bolt for the Department of Homeland Security beforehand.
Faced with this still-under-appeal reality, Kelly has been making the rounds to various talk shows, offering his defense of the stop and frisk program. His wording suggests he and Bloomberg have been reading over each other's shoulders.
"The losers in this, if this case is allowed to stand, are people who live in minority communities," he said on CBS' Face the Nation. He noted that 97% of shooting victims are black or Hispanic, reasoned that similar demographics apply if a stop deters a killing and added that there have been more than 7,300 fewer killings in the 11 full years of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's tenure so far than in the 11 years before.I'd like to hear from some minorities if that's OK with you, Kelly. I'd like to see if they're willing to "trade off" a little bit of theoretical safety for the freedom to walk around without being judged as "furtive" or "suspicious" or "not white." You'll have to forgive me for not taking your word for it.
Kelly states crime stats as if that excuses the violations committed by his officers. It doesn't. Judge Scheindlin refused to consider the lowered crime rates as justification for constitutional violations. We've all heard the phrase, "the end justifies the means," and it's never used in reference to appropriate "means." But Kelly and Bloomberg do this all the time in reference to stop and frisk. "Our crime rate is historically low, therefore we'll do whatever we want to maintain it." Not acceptable.
Once the stats have been presented, it's time to switch to Argument B -- the violent crime spectre.
If stop and frisk were abandoned, "no question about it —violent crime will go up," he said on NBC's Meet the Press.This is one of stop and frisk defenders' favorite claims, one that plays on irrational fear. Irrational fear is one of the government's biggest allies, whether it's the DHS or a local police force. Claiming bad things will happen keeps bad laws and policies in place. As long as the laws and policies stay on the books and "bad things" fail to happen, officials are constantly "proven" right.
Citing these irrational fears also prevents these laws and policies from being struck down. There are very few government officials willing to roll back anything out of fear that if something bad does happen, the blame will rest squarely on those who removed the so-called safeguard.
Kelly's repetition of this argument is the most self-serving of rhetoric, seeing as it's almost completely failsafe. Should there be an uptick in criminal activity post-stop and frisk, the supporters will point out that they warned this would happen. It doesn't even have to be a large or sustained uptick. All it takes is a couple of random acts of violence to trigger the "I told you so" contingent.
It's a win-win argument, even at this point. As the appeals process rolls on, crime level fluctuations will be watched and deployed by stop and frisk supporters. If crime stays at its present rate or slides lower, it will be held up as evidence that unconstitutional searches work. If it heads up, Kelly, Bloomberg et al will claim the "uncertainty" surrounding the court's decision is impairing police work.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: minorities, nypd, ray kelly, stop and frisk, up is down
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
observation
so if you can't feel my WOOHOO up against the wall crime will go up because your too incompetent and stupid to do things the right way and get results??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'd say it's a big win for the department to be able to stop (committing) hundreds of thousands of crimes per year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Chief Kelly,
Sincerely,
Reality
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heh.
Nice distinction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Heh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No, actually, I would NOT want to hear from minorities. (Or anyone else.) If most people who happen to have a particular skin color support an illegal program, that would not make that program OK.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Unconstituional == Illegal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Unconstituional == Illegal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Unconstituional == Illegal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There should be a religion for George Orwell. That guy read the future.
Minority Protection Program
Stopping you
Harassing you
Detaining you
Searching you
Requesting your papers
Imprisoning you for minor offenses that everyone does
Shooting/tazing you in some circumstances like if you reach for your phone
Now turn around, put your hands up NOW MOTHERFUCKER.
NYPD are trying to protect the shit out of you.
Be grateful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's funny to see ignorant people claim correlation in complete absence of supporting data, and in stark contrast to multitudes of data supporting conclusions in direct contradiction to said claims.
These people pay good money for data analysts, one would expect a more through understanding of the facts behind crime rates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
4 + 4 = 8 No thanks.
4 + 4 = 44 Hired!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The goal is not to understand the truth, the goal is to further their agenda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There are many ways to go about crime prevention. He chose the worst possible method amongst numerous legal alternatives. Every person whose death can be linked to the courts determining that Ray Kelly's program was unconstitutional are Ray Kelly's fault, not the courts'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Well, now wait a second", there are people who are actually doing what the police is supposed to do and they don't use guns at all and use the minimum violence possible if for not other reason because they too would be in jail otherwise and still can do meaningful work and keep the streets safer, how do they do it?
ABC News: Real life superhero Phoenix Jones tackles streets of Seattle
Not that I believe everyone should down a super hero costume and go out trying to be a hero, that guy there is an marcial artist, his costume is bullet-proof and he got shot at, had to fight knife touting people and probably run more than once, and he does that without a gun or seriously injuring anyone, maybe the NYPD could take some lessons from those guys? on how to be efficient without the use of violence to accomplish what they need.
Quote:
Wanna know what else is true?
Since the 90's violent crimes saw a very sharp decrease in incidence all over America
Wikipedia: Crime in the United States
And nobody seems to know why that happened, sure it was not police enforcement.
Even the statistical numbers have changed, whites are the number one criminals in America, maybe in NY is the other way around and blacks are the ones that go most to jail and murder each other but nationally male whites are the ones most prone to commit murder, rape according to the numbers
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=31
All in all this smells to me like a lucky politician got some good winds (crime declining naturally) and using that to justify any half brain ideas he has about how to secure something, ignoring all the abuse his law enforcement agents do in the process.
If I was a conspiracy nut I probably use what he said there to claim he is a white racist politician that is trying to use absurd arguments to justify targeting black minorities in such a manner, but no that is probably not the case at all, occam razor here is more probable, crime have been going down naturally for the last 20 years and the idiot just believes that what he did is the principal cause of it, meaning stupidity is the probable cause of such immoral, absurd, relapse, dangerous and irresponsible acts in the name of security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Further would this mean that the police in NY is targeting the wrong color and race in their racial profiling?
I read somewhere that blacks and hispanics are more likely to be frisked than white males, shouldn't be the inverse if we should use the statistical numbers?
How can searching the more likely victims group stop the assailants that are not subject to the invasive procedure?
This opens up a lot of hard questions and I am not even black.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's important to note that the same agency making the claims about violent crime going up will also be generating the statistics about violent crime going up.... and we've watched The Wire. A lot of the things they showed were absolutely real, and one of them was the way the police and politicians screw with the crime stats to make themselves look good.
The same shit they pull to 'reduce' the crime rate can be used in reverse just as easy. So they will be absolutely be 'proven right', no matter what the actual outcome is. They'll make certain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The biggest crime to me committed in New York is that New Yorkers let them get away with it for years. No riots, no push back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
USA USA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Policing for Profit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]