Analysis Of The San Diego Police Department Data

However, the events of the last few weeks paint a different story. In our society, it is common practice to profile, stop and frisk drivers and randomly (Epp & Maynard-Moody, 2013). For the good of the country, there is a greater opportunity to find guns, stolen merchandise, drugs, etc. when these stops occur. This appears to be great because everyone wants to themselves and their loved ones to be safe. Consequently, in the wage against drugs, racial minorities are stopped all over the country more than whites. For investigatory stops, people are normally stopped because of how they drive and if they are black. A “black man, who is age twenty-five or younger, has a 28 percent chance of being stopped for an investigatory reason over the course of a year; a similar young white man has a 12.5 percent chance, and a similar young white woman has only a 7 percent chance” (Epp and Maynard-Moody, 2013). The focus is on younger African-American males; because they are three to five times more subject to investigatory

Apart from periodically publishing stop and search records, supervisors and managers of police force are now required to closely monitor such statistics and take timely actions if something wrong is being observed. Also stricter rules on stop and search have since been imposed, along with the requirement of police officers writing a detailed report on spot about every single incident which subjects to review seems helpful in improving police conduct (Fyfe 1979; Skogan and Frydl 2004 in Miller 2010). While stop and search practice has been somehow improved, racial discrimination can still be seen in stop and search statistics. The notion of “Black and minority ethnic groups, particularly black people, have for many years been disproportionately at the receiving end of police stop and search—a fact associated with profound community resentment towards the police” (Bowling and Phillips 2002 in Miller 2010) still largely applies today. Miller’s (2010) analysis indicate that black people are about 6 times more likely to be stopped and searched, while it is about 2 times more likely for Asians. Similar idea is seen in Bennetto’s (2009) report, which draws on police statistics that shows in 2009 “black people are seven times more likely to be stopped and searched than white”, worse than Miller’s analysis with the most recent figures in 2008. No official explaination is provided by Police, but Bennetto (2009) assumes this may be caused by simply discrimination of

The Editorial Board of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports issues of racial profiling regarding police statistics tracking the race of people they stop. This policy set in February 2000, was meant to “combat the scourge of racial profiling” (16). According to James Buford, chief executive officer of the Urban League in 2000, suggested that police officers deny that racial profiling is an issue. Through the new analysis made fifteen years later, the editorial board believes that the “denial is still rampant” (16). Attorney General Chris Koster released the annual statistics of traffic stops in Missouri displaying that racial disparity was still prevalent. According to the editorial board, Blacks and Hispanics were more likely to be searched

The judicial system in America has always endured much skepticism as to whether or not there is racial profiling amongst arrests. The stop and frisk policy of the NYPD has caused much controversy and publicity since being applied because of the clear racial disparity in stops. Now the question remains; Are cops being racially biased when choosing whom to stop or are they just targeting “high crime” neighborhoods, thus choosing minorities by default? This paper will examine the history behind stop and frisk policies. Along with referenced facts about the Stop and Frisk Policy, this paper will include and discuss methods and findings of my own personal field research.

The statistics show that to be an African American or Hispanic in New York you are more than twice as likely to get stopped as a white or Asian person. Studies of reports show that 15,000 or 30% of stops are deemed unconstitutional; and those are just the ones that are reported, imagine all of those that go unreported. Imagine all of those people who were victimized just because of the color of their skin. The stop-and-frisk procedure was once a good thing that helped clean up the streets, but now it’s becoming an epidemic of racial profiling, and teaching racism and intolerance to anyone who is a victim or witness of these stops.

With blacks being stopped more than half of the time, and Latinos being stopped around 30 percent, its clear why these groups along with other minority groups feel they are being singled out and picked on; in fact, Mayor Bill de Blasio even made a public apology for the policy’s negative impact after the New York Times (2014) claimed that Judge Shira A. Scheindlin described it as “a policy of indirect racial profiling.” It’s reasons like these that encourage people to believe this tactic is inherently corrupt. If police officers are not using clear logic and reasonable suspicion when stopping individuals, it can create a major separation between our law enforcement agents and society and allow for noble cause corruption. While this policy has the ability to create major distrust and dislike for the cops, however, it can also have a very positive impact as well. For example, if officers continue to improve the accuracy of their stops and become more successful in taking weapons off the streets and deterring crime, their communities should begin to back them and also this

The NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices raise serious concerns over racial profiling, illegal stops and privacy rights. The Department’s own reports on its stop and frisk activity confirm what many people in communities of color across the city have long known: The police are stopping hundreds of thousands of law abiding New Yorkers every year, and the vast majority are black and Latino. In 2011, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 685,724 times. 605,328 were totally innocent (88 percent). 350,743 were black (53 percent). 223,740

Moreover, minorities were detained for longer periods of time per stop than whites, and were 80 percent of those whose cars were searched after being stopped. The discriminatory treatment of minority drivers was duly noted by Volusia County Sergeant Dale Anderson, who asked a white motorist he had stopped how he was doing; the motorist responded “Not very good,” to which Anderson responded, “Could be worse – could be black” (civilrights.org, 2011).

A study done by the University of Kanas shows that African Americans are 3 times more often than whites to be pulled over by a police officer. It was also found that that black males have a 28% chance of being pulled over which is 15% higher than white males. There’s a phrase called “Driving while black” which means that just because of your skin color you can be stopped by a police officer for no reason at all. Racial profiling which means to” use of race or ethnicity as for having a reason to suspect someone of having committed an offense”. And it is one of the biggest issues recently to come into light. With the murders of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown social media has brought the issue of racial profiling and police brutality to an

In all three situations (motorists stopped on roads, passengers stopped at the airport, and shoppers at the mall questioned about theft), Whites did not believe that racial profiling had anything to do with the hypothetical individual getting stopped, unlike Blacks and Hispanics, who the majority of, believed that the main reason for the individual getting stopped had something to do with racial profiling. All of these feelings of racial profiling have gotten worse since the start of the 2016 presidential election. In a study done by Yahoo.com, it has come to light that the majority of Trump supporters believe the in the idea of Blacks as “violent, lazy criminals” (Rodriguez). This has only served to heighten the tensions between races, at a time when Americans should work towards coming closer together to choose a new president. The truth of the matter is, a vast majority of the time, the colored individual will be the one stopped, and although times exist when individuals not of color are stopped, the cause of societies’ fears will almost always be the individual of

Law enforcement officials often confront situations where it’s an almost certainty that illegal activities are taking place despite not having sufficient resources to investigate every possible perpetrator. Research on race and vehicle stops by police show that African American drivers are disproportionately stopped in traffic by police for driving violations (Kowalski & Lundman, 2007). The reason is because law enforcement officials use characterizations or

Racial profiling has been a very monumental issue from the past few years. Race and orientation are the dominant characteristics the authorities look when captivating in this category of profiling. The incontrovertible pattern of race-based on the stops from the police is a problem that millions of African-American and Latino-American motorist encounter regularly on this nation's highway. This play on words DWI (Driving while Intoxicated) refers to the employed police practice of using an traffic violations as a pretext to stop black or Hispanic. The police assume that they are involved in a criminal activity unrelated to the driving. These policemen have no right or legal cause to carry stops besides the enforcing a traffic bylaw.

Evidence of the disproportionate percentage of minorities incarcerated is readily available. According to Katheryn Russell, author of Color of Crime, blacks make up 12% of the overall U.S. population. Yet they represent 30% of arrests and 50% of those incarcerated (28-29). The most amazing statistic comes from Marvin Free, Jr. whose research found that African Americans living in cities with a population of 250,000 or more have a 51% chance of being arrested (African Americans..., 8). Russell listed many of the ridiculous reasons minorities have been pulled over by police officers: 1) Driving a luxury car, 2) driving with a white woman, 3) driving in a white neighborhood, 4) driving late at night and several others. The reasoning behind many traffic stops of blacks were so ludicrous that Russell believed a new charge should be established: DWB or "Driving While Black" (Color...,33).

Yet when discussing race, its history, and present state, most misconceptions as seen above are accepted without question. These myths have been developed over a century of time and have become imbedded in our minds. When we think of racial profiling, we generally think of a person of color, perhaps a Black or Latino man or woman, in a car who gets stopped by police based on skin color. Often, a minor traffic infraction, like failing to signal when changing lanes, provides the legal rationale for such stops, when in reality the stops are motivated by race.

“One. The police stop blacks and Latinos at rates that are much higher than whites. In New York City, where people of color make up about half of the population, 80% of the NYPD stops were of blacks and Latinos. When whites were stopped, only 8% were frisked (Quigley, 2010).” Police stops are a very common effect on society. It isn’t fair that police don’t hold everyone accountable the same way. Not every cop is that way but there are that selected few who still have that racist mindset and hold it against innocent people. It’s no secret that in New York especially, there is a lot of crime and gang activity produced by different minority groups in the city. However, The facts does not provide a good reason that in routine stops are people of color targeted and frisked down compared to