In theory, the stop and frisk program seems to be a good idea to stagger and control crime rates in the US, however, the statistics of the results clearly show otherwise: as presented by Emmanuel, only about 0.2% of cases resulted arrests. A potential flaw with the program is the fact that it is the officer's personal judgement that determines who is "suspicious" and who isn't, and evidently this judgement is mostly faulty. Instead of relying on stereotypes due to gender, ethnicity, or culture that fail to sustain any truth, trends should be concluded from crime databases in order to compile a list of common behavior associated with certain illegal activities. From this list of traits, an impartial and anti-discriminatory source, officers can justify suspicion with less temptation to abuse their power, and perhaps aim to achieve the original objective of the Stop and Frisk program.
I think it is completely unreasonable to even have such a program. Most officers catches people who they think are suspicious only base on their race, skin, accent, weird actions and so on. Most of them are proven innocent and suffer a lot from this. I believe the role of officers should play is someone who catch criminals only if they have golden proofs or if there’s enough signs that proven them guilty. However, I doubt this is the case in the program. Many officers even uses it as revenge to their enemies, which is obviously not going to do any good to the society.
In theory, the stop and frisk program seems to be a good idea to stagger and control crime rates in the US, however, the statistics of the results clearly show otherwise: as presented by Emmanuel, only about 0.2% of cases resulted arrests. A potential flaw with the program is the fact that it is the officer's personal judgement that determines who is "suspicious" and who isn't, and evidently this judgement is mostly faulty. Instead of relying on stereotypes due to gender, ethnicity, or culture that fail to sustain any truth, trends should be concluded from crime databases in order to compile a list of common behavior associated with certain illegal activities. From this list of traits, an impartial and anti-discriminatory source, officers can justify suspicion with less temptation to abuse their power, and perhaps aim to achieve the original objective of the Stop and Frisk program.
ReplyDeleteI think it is completely unreasonable to even have such a program. Most officers catches people who they think are suspicious only base on their race, skin, accent, weird actions and so on. Most of them are proven innocent and suffer a lot from this. I believe the role of officers should play is someone who catch criminals only if they have golden proofs or if there’s enough signs that proven them guilty. However, I doubt this is the case in the program. Many officers even uses it as revenge to their enemies, which is obviously not going to do any good to the society.
ReplyDelete