NYPD officers testify stop-and-frisk policy driven by quota system and race

Bloomberg needs to focus more on this issue and not so much on the large soft drinks that he has been trying to eliminate from NY.

I believe there are a couple or so existing threads on ATS that touch on this subject but fail to succinctly target the real issue here, which in my mind is not so much the financial impact of the silly quota system but the race-drive agenda by the NYPD.

The NYPD has stopped approximately 5 million people over the last decade. According to department data, the vast of majority of those stopped are African American or Latino, many of them young men. In recent years nearly nine out of 10 of those stopped by police have walked away from the stops without a summons or arrest.

Wow, that's a shocker, "In recent years nearly 9 out of 10 of those stopped by police have walked away from the stops without a summons or arrest."

So, even though the city attorneys are still braying that their officers are only going where the crimes are and not focused on race, yet the statistics tell a different story.

Wait, there's more.

Officer Adhyl Polanco began his testimony Tuesday by saying "there's a difference between" the department's policies on paper and "what goes on out there", on the city's streets.

Polanco testified that in 2009, officers in his Bronx precinct were expected to issue 20 summons and make one arrest per month. If they did not they would risk denied vacation, being separated from longtime partners, undesirable assignments and other consequences.

And as a consequence...

"We were handcuffing kids for no reason," Polanco said. Claiming he was increasingly disturbed by what he was witnessing in his precinct, Polcanco began secretly recording his roll call meetings.

On a track played Thursday, Deputy Inspector Christopher McCormack was heard telling Serrano he needed to stop "the right people, the right time, the right location". When asked what he believed McCormack meant Serrano told the court: "he meant blacks and Hispanics."

SMH

Later in the tape McCormack says: "I have no problem telling you this … male blacks. And I told you at roll call, and I have no problem [to] tell you this, male blacks 14 to 21."

NYPD officers testify stop-and-frsk policy

As our police chief said ."Our 92% of the city is black and %99 of the crime is comitted by someone black do you think I'm going to waste my recources harrassing white people??"

There's minorties by population and minorities by crime.

reply to post by mikell
Amazing comment.

In recent years nearly 9 out of 10 of those stopped by police have walked away from the stops without a summons or arrest.

BTW, I drive to NY from Maryland almost every 3-4 months to visit family and friends and I have been stopped several times by the NYPD for no good reasons at all and I must say the officers testifying have valid concerns.

My cousin is also a high ranking NYPD detective and even she is ashamed of the department's stop and frisk no good policy.

It's one thing to be suspected of a crime or committing a crime versus stopping someone because they fit the profile of a supposed criminal. Big difference.

no perfect answer on this one, as high crime areas tend to be more likely to be black/latino in New York, of course they are going to be the ones stopped more frequently. Ironically, this policy has probably saved a lot of black/latino lives, injuries, property etc as they tend to be the victims in these areas (obviously)

Originally posted by Credenceskynyrd
no perfect answer on this one, as high crime areas tend to be more likely to be black/latino in New York, of course they are going to be the ones stopped more frequently. Ironically, this policy has probably saved a lot of black/latino lives, injuries, property etc as they tend to be the victims in these areas (obviously)

I see your point here, but it isn't as if those high crime areas are exclusively black/latino.

The stop and frisk is a violation of the Constitution. Too bad the Constitution means nothing to our elected politicians or the SCOTUS any more.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Credenceskynyrd
no perfect answer on this one, as high crime areas tend to be more likely to be black/latino in New York, of course they are going to be the ones stopped more frequently. Ironically, this policy has probably saved a lot of black/latino lives, injuries, property etc as they tend to be the victims in these areas (obviously)

I see your point here, but it isn't as if those high crime areas are exclusively black/latino.

The stop and frisk is a violation of the Constitution. Too bad the Constitution means nothing to our elected politicians or the SCOTUS any more.

no, not exclusively, but overwhelmingly, same way as those stopped are not exclusively black/latino

The Constitutional point I take

reply to post by Credenceskynyrd


Your point is valid, for sure.
I suspect that there might be some racial profiling going on though, I should have put it that way.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Credenceskynyrd
no perfect answer on this one, as high crime areas tend to be more likely to be black/latino in New York, of course they are going to be the ones stopped more frequently. Ironically, this policy has probably saved a lot of black/latino lives, injuries, property etc as they tend to be the victims in these areas (obviously)

I see your point here, but it isn't as if those high crime areas are exclusively black/latino.

The stop and frisk is a violation of the Constitution. Too bad the Constitution means nothing to our elected politicians or the SCOTUS any more.

I rarely disagree with you, but this time I do. What seems more logical, if only white people are causing crimes to make everyones lives tougher. And make even more draconian laws, or to simply spend a bigger portion of you rescources on the demographic that literally commits more than 3/4 of all crimes?

It isnt racist if it is true, it is called a fact when it is true.

I wish they would do more to address the root cause of the problem, but the problem is black coulture glorifying criminals, only those inside of a coulture may change the coulture. From what I see, blacks seem perfectly happy with the status quo, as I dont see many trying to change it. Instead I see most supporting it, and teaching it to their kids. Who will most likely only continue what should be obvious to anyone with a brain, is fail logic.

I cant make them teach their kids what is right and wrong, if they want to let their loser gangbanger rapper heroes to continue doing it, I have no issue with watching them be thrown in jail wholesale when they continue to cause almost all crimes in the country.

If blacks acted like whites or hispanics, or chinese, japanese, indian, native amercan indiana, inuit, etc........ this would be a non issue.

They want to have their own coultural flavor, I get that, and I applaud that, as they shoukdnt be like whites or latino etc... they arent. But do they really have to pick the worst coulture on earth, and continue to force it on their children who will grow up to be in jail just like their daddy and uncle and older brother?

Most folks would have long since figured out the problem and addressed it, thus problem solved, or at least mitigated to a lesser extent at the least.

If you want to hate, or flame etc... for this post, please just pm me, dont derail the thread because of my opinions.

reply to post by inverslyproportional

Nah, no hate or flaming.



I agree with a lot of what you said. I sent you a PM with the differences I have.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


If you stop minorities a disproportionate amount of the time they will appear to commit a disproportionate number of crimes. If you only stop minorities, you will only catch minorities. Have you ever considered that the obvious racial bias against minorities is the reason they are convicted more often, and not that they actually commit more crimes?

Originally posted by d1gov
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

If you stop minorities a disproportionate amount of the time they will appear to commit a disproportionate number of crimes. If you only stop minorities, you will only catch minorities. Have you ever considered that the obvious racial bias against minorities is the reason they are convicted more often, and not that they actually commit more crimes?

edit on 25-3-2013 by d1gov because: (no reason given)

I will respectfully disagree. They arent only stopped more often because they are minorities. They are stopped kore often because it is the job of police to enforce law, so they spend kore time in areas with higher crime rates, which just so happen to be predominantly minority populations.

Have you ever been to the bad side of town before? People stand on the street corners openly breaking the laws selling drugs etc.. their own communities allow this behavior, and so are helping to cause it.

It is called enabling, it is a common factor in the continuation of behaviors.

The problem is the black culture itself, which leads to black youth looking up to criminals, thus they emulate the behavior of their role models.

I dont see too many white cultural icons bragging about slapping women or selling drugs or stealing or gangbanging or killing folks that dont like their barbaric hlbehaviors etc... this list could go on all day.

I dont see it in the immigrant cultures of any of the asian races, cambodians, vietnamese, chinese ( to be fair, I onkyknow chin chinsese folks, none of the other groups of chinese immigrants) europeans, japenese, tai, mid eastern iraqi, afghani, iranian, saudi, hindu or Sikh indians, or even native americans.

It is almost solely an american black problem.

They are the root cause of it, only they can adress it and fix it. We can point fingers and argue, and say what we think about it, but in the end only american black folks can take the reins and fix the problem. All of the rest of us outside the issue cannot cause a change, no matter what laws or ideas we come up with etc..


Since the choose to continue the madness, the polce have no recourse but to imprison them in an attempt to remoge the criminal element from society at large.

As it is the right of every citizen to safely walk down any street at any time of day or night and feel safe.instead go to the wrong street in any ghetto and do somthing as simple as wear the wrong color and your liable to take a beating etc.. this is madness. Who would want this kind of environment around their kids?

Now I dont mean that it is all black folks, as should be obvious, it is just a large percentage of them in select regions of the country.

I believe reverend King would be quite put off by the behaviors of some of his black brothers and sisters. I am just glad he didnt live to see the state of those he fought so hard for, and paid dearly to ensure they have an equal shot ar freedom on all levels.

Originally posted by d1gov
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

If you stop minorities a disproportionate amount of the time they will appear to commit a disproportionate number of crimes. If you only stop minorities, you will only catch minorities. Have you ever considered that the obvious racial bias against minorities is the reason they are convicted more often, and not that they actually commit more crimes?

edit on 25-3-2013 by d1gov because: (no reason given)

this is not the case, there is no chicken and egg scenario here ffs, the police target areas where high crime occurs

You can pretend that there is this racial equality of crimes committed, but for whatever reason, there isn't