Former NYPD Chief Ray Kelly Still Trying To Sell His Post-Stop-And-Frisk Apocalypse But The Stats Aren't Backing Him Up
from the sorry,-don't-need-any-FEAR-today dept
Former NYPD police chief Ray Kelly is still telling his stop-and-frisk story to whoever will listen. The story is -- and always has been -- that if the NYPC isn't allowed to make hundreds of thousands of unconstitutional stops every year, the city will slide back into lawlessness. The supporting evidence offered for this pending apocalypse never added up. Kelly claimed stop-and-frisk kept guns off the street but statistics maintained by the NYPD itself showed that the difference between stop-and-frisk-free 2003 and 2012's 500,000+ stops was a grand total of 96 guns -- a difference of .02%.
What stop-and-frisk was good for was low-level drug busts, almost entirely for minor marijuana possession. If anything, the data would point to an increase in marijuana use rather than violence, but in a recent interview with WNYC, Kelly is still pushing the "deadly future" narrative despite data to the contrary.
I think the lawsuit was an abomination. The judge was removed from the case and I think every indication is if the appeal were allowed to go forward, it would have been reversed and it's a shame Mayor de Blasio did that because I think people will suffer. You see shootings up now; I don't know if there's a direct relationship now, maybe time will tell.Kelly's data is correct -- at least as much as he's actually willing to quote. He hedged this assertion with "maybe it's related" (to a decline in stops), but most likely believes it actually is. He told WNYC's Brian Lehrer that "people will suffer" thanks to the court's decision. The problem is this: shootings are up 5.5% in New York City during a period of steep decline in stop-and-frisk stops (less than 33,000 stops in the last half of 2013 compared to 2012's total of 532,911 stops). But they are up 5.4% across the state, in areas where stop-and-frisk was never implemented or curbed.
Not only that, but despite the bump in shootings, there's been an overall decrease in violent crime in New York City during this same time frame. The New York Time's analysis of stop-and-frisk data shows violent crime dropping in four once-heavily targeted areas of the city. It's too early to tell if these numbers will hold as stop-and-frisk is phased out, but it's certainly a very different picture than the one Ray Kelly and then-Mayor Bloomberg tried to paint after the court's decision.
It also should be noted that even if crime does rise, that still isn't a justification for returning to the stop-and-frisk program. As Scheindlin noted, the city's claim that it was an effective deterrent (a claim that itself was questionable -- dramatic decreases in violent crime were noted in other major cities that didn't perform these random stops) ultimately had no bearing on the Constitutionality of the searches. In other words, just because warrantless searches have the potential to catch more criminals doesn't make warrantless searches OK.
Chief Kelly and Mayor Bloomberg sold a lot of fear from their respective offices during their tenure as city employees. Now, they've lost their platforms and their power to bend policy to fit their vivid imaginations. They both argued that the limitations imposed by the Constitution made it harder to police the city and would ultimately endanger its inhabitants. These claims are proving to be empty and showing them for what they actually were: power grabs fronting as concern for the safety of the public.
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: nypd, ray kelly, stop and frisk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Another day, another liar cop
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One has to remember that the Constitution is the only reason we have Law Enforcement those same laws are not flexible remove the Constitution that all the laws of the land are based upon and you remove any and all power of the Government locally and nationally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Now, they wouldn't have the legal authority anymore, but when has that stopped them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He'd be forever the "self-confessed constitution violating chief Kelly".
It's the same reason that other police chief with constitution-violation rulings against him (protector of Child abusers, Joe Arpaio) continues to double-down on the crazy stuff. Admitting fallibility is financial suicide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The drop in crime the rate over the past three some decades is not related in any way to the nyc stop and frisk program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The thing is, none of these megalomaniacs asked the people if they want such added security in detriment of such programs. I'd say the targets of the ethnic profiling (the community) would strongly disagree.
Add that to the fact that the absence of the program didn't see any noticeable increase in violence and their constant crying "WOLF!" can now be safely ignored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dopes.
You don't even live in the worlds you pass judgement upon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dopes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dopes.
Or because you're black. Regardless, looking like a shitbird or being black are not acceptable excuses for having your constitutional rights violated.
I wonder why you have yet to experience the joys of being patted down by a cop for no legitimate reason, assuming you look and act the way you comment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dopes.
Because, unless I am completely mistake, he is a cop, and to be more precise, the kind of cop that make the rest of them look bad, as if memory serves he mentioned once that he saw nothing wrong with a fist to the face to 'calm down' any suspect that wasn't compliant enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dopes.
I love it when you guys actually say how you really feel. It just confirms the suspicion the rest of us have in you.
And when we know where the problem lies, we can begin to correct it.
Remanding you to a job more suitable for your demeanor would be a great place to start - such as fryolator operator, or something with significantly less stress.It's obvious that the job has stressed you out to the point where your limited mental capacity cannot handle it - hence your contempt for your employers. And I'm one for weeding out those people who complain about their jobs. If you can't handle it, find another line of work.
Thanks for helping us weed out "shitbirds" like you. You're clearly a disgrace to the profession.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dopes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dopes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dopes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh yeah! It was awesome the way a tank that wants to get into your pants is awesome.
"If you feel targeted, it's probably because you look and act like a shitbird."
Or maybe I'm just black or hispanic. Try reading the numbers as well as looking at the pictures and the headlines
"You think NYC innovated this?"
We don't care, we're just happy they've stopped
"Try that act in a small Southern town and you'll see stop-and-frisk in action for real. It's a logical and useful response to bullshit in the streets..."
There really is very little bullshit in the streets of NYC. Perhaps you're thinking of Pamplona
"alternate responses CLEARLY not forthcoming from second-guessers like yourselves."
It's true that your post are not required to make sense, perhaps you could put aside your fugue state and join the conversation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if they are not doing anything wrong they have no reason to object. Isn't that the whole premise of stop and frisk?
Or do the police believe themselves above the laws they like to go on and on about when it comes to violating citizens rights
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spinning the facts for dummies
Obviously, the program was so effective that it's effects were felt even in those other cities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They stop you and take you to jail until the proper bribe has been paid.
Unless, of course, you are important. Than they do not stop you at all. Nicaraguan cops don't mess with important people, they know they will be killed if they do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]