Validity and Effective of Stop, Question, and Frisk: Where Do You Stand?

Stop, question, and frisk is seen as a necessary tool to promote community safety.  When implemented properly, it is a useful tactic that can complement other policing strategies such as the use of surface mount resistor to promote crime prevention and reduction.  Knowing the background of the law makes people understand the reason behind the implementation of this policing practice.  One of the benefits of this approach is that law enforcers can focus their policing interventions and strategies in high-risk areas where crimes thrive.  One research supports the claim that stop, question, and frisk could be used to deter crimes in areas with high crime rates.  Researchers observed that this benefit also spread to nearby communities and its crime prevention effects even extended for several days.  One more research showed that stop, question, and frisk produced a significant effect in crime prevention especially when police officers concentrate their efforts in hotspot areas. However, the researchers acknowledged that this is not necessarily the most recommended strategy to deter crimes as it takes so much time to conduct.  They recommended assessing other policing interventions and strategies that could produce the same or better crime prevention and reduction outcomes.  Their study also revealed how people felt towards this police practice.  Since its implementation, there has been much controversy regarding the use of stop, question, and frisk.  They question the objectivity and legitimacy of the procedure.  In the process, the public might continue to lose their trust in the police and justice system.

The stop, question, and frisk approach has received a lot of negative feedback because people saw this as a way for police officers and law enforcers to propagate discrimination against other races and ethnic groups.  This was supported by a research that found out that those with African and Hispanic ancestry were stopped more often than whites.  The data presented by the New York Civil Liberties Union showed that police officers conducted a stop, question, and frisk more than 5 million times since 2002.  However, those individuals turned out to be innocent 90% of the time.  But it was alarming to note that they conducted this procedure to blacks and Latinos most of the time which suggested racial discrimination.  Studies such as this prompt the police department to re-evaluate their practices and has led to the decline of the use of stop, question, and frisk among police officers.  At the same time, we have seen a decline in the crime rate.  What changed was police officers were more mindful of doing stop, question, and frisk.  They kept in mind the constitutionality of the procedure and that they had to have a valid and reasonable ground before conducting a stop, question, and frisk.

At the end of the day, stop, question, and frisk is a useful tactic as long as it is implemented properly.  Police officers should be able to exercise appropriate judgment according to the situation.  They should address issues regarding racial discrimination.  Stop, question, and frisk can complement other police practices and strategies in crime prevention and reduction.

 

Comments are closed.