Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumNYPD Stop & Frisk Policy on Trial - Racial bias and arrest quotas revealed
bossy22
(3,547 posts)they are called "productivity goals". either way I have a large problem with requiring any amount of arrests/tickets. What happened if no one broke the law, would that mean innocent people will start getting arrested/ticketed.
Though when it comes to the racial bias...I'm not sure I'm 100% against it. Stop and frisk is mainly a fight against gang related crime and it just so happens that the overwhelming amount of gang violence is committed by "minorities". It's logical then to target those groups who are most likely going to be involved.
I know I will be flamed for this comment but I think racial profiling is acceptable- as long as it is not a blanket policy. We do it in almost all walks of life and it is not necessarily bad. In medicine, the ethnicity of the person will change the direction in which we lean in regards to a diagnosis (some groups have diseases that are more prevalent then others- i.e. sickle cell)
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)I completely disagree with that. It's dehumanizing and racist and terrorizes the people who are subject to the random searches.
The root of gang violence is the war on drugs. Stop the drug war to end gang violence.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)That's so that when they go to court, they can say that they don't have quotas, but these goals are actually quotas in which officers are judged when it comes to their appraisals.
And don't get me started on the racial bias. I can tell you as someone who spent many years in NYC, that it's not just racial bias, but age and belief bias. If they see someone with the "wrong" kind of bumper stickers on his or her car, they will be stopped. If a person is dressed like a "hippie" they will be stopped on the street.
If gang violence is the issue, than why are they not concentrating on gang violence, and not random stops?