The stop and frisk program is a practice that was mostly conducted by the police department in New York City where civilians would get stopped on the streets, searched for any contrabands or drugs. The program sometimes saw the civilians getting detained in the police premises and questioned for some time. According to Mathew McKnight (2013), over sixty thousands stops by the police were unconstitutional. Social stratification and race significantly affected the employment of stop and frisk policy. Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled that the program was violating the United States Constitution through racial profiling (Cassidy, 2013). The conclusion by Judge Shira was arrived at after some witnesses coming forward and through statistical evidence presented in court. Cassidy (2013) indicated that the manner in which the police conducted the stop and frisk policy was not fair. In some neighborhoods, the program went too far and even leading to harassment based on an individual's race.
To determine if the claims that the stops were to an extent based on racial profiling, a research study was conducted by Fagan. Fagan noted the total number of stops made in the area of enforcement by the police and compared the figure to the race of each person's stopped. The main aim of the research conducted by Fagan was to determine the racial distribution of stops and the police officers were supposed to hold the stops without being biased. The results of Fagan's research showed that the minorities were stopped more than the whites. In the analysis done by Fagan, it was determined that even the areas dominated by the whites, the number of blacks and Hispanics stopped was high. The study further revealed that apart from stopping the minority groups more, the percentage outcomes of using force was also high (Cassidy, 2013). However, the probability of the stop leading to an arrest or summon for the blacks and Hispanics compared to the whites was lower.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Precision policing is an approach that is used to make sure that the public is safe. This kind of policing is proactive and almost precognitive. Suspects committing high-value crimes get investigated by a well-organized police structure that gathers relevant information and data to build an investigation. This type of program requires a collaborative community and the interagency cooperation (Suszan, 2017). A whole department is set aside for the task that was once left for a detective officer. The controversial program of stop and frisk is now a thing in the past, and the police officers have now moved to the identification of data with the precision policing. In as much as stop and frisking program being instrumental in the high profile suspects' arrests, it was never key in crime reduction rate. On top of a stagnant crime rate, stop and frisk policy led to an increase in community distrust and dislike.
This new way of policing, the officers back up their arrest with sufficient data and information leading to a reduction in the number of arrests. The focus is now ion the individuals mostly committing crimes and the most dangerous gangs. The relationship with the community they serve is becoming good in precision policing using the Five pillars. Trust is one of the components which the agency strives to keep (Suszan, 2017). The agency wants to maintain trust and a good collaboration with the other agencies and the community at large. Training is also another pillar of the program whereby the agency intends to use the least possible force to bring situations under control. Moreover, terrorism is one of the cornerstones that prepare the crowd on effective monitoring and crime suppression.
Technology is also a priority for the program that has improved technological infrastructure and an up updated security system. Tackling crime is the last pillar of precision policing. The agency through this pillar wants to use their knowledge and expertise to organize comprehensive investigation reports on various crimes. Precision policing has become effective leading to a reduced crime rate of 4.1 percent (Suszan, 2017). Precision policing is not only useful but also a smart way of doing the police work and reducing the hostility between the officers and the community members.
I think precision policing will try and rebuild the already damaged relationship with the community. The stop and frisk policy oversaw a lot of tension between the police and the city, but with the introduction precision policy approach, the police force will make sure that ease the strained relationship. The framework of precision policing wants to make sure that the officers always collaborate meaningfully with the community (Bratton & Murad, 2018). The agency wants to do less of enforcement and more of connectivity in the efforts to rebuild the relationship. The program also wants to ensure a reasonable amount of force will get used when necessary.
Also, precision policing will see a reduction in the number of stopping civilians on the streets. The program is working towards an investigation approach whereby the agency gathers all the information on the suspected criminals before any arrests get done. This approach will minimize the number of non-offenders arrested. Also, the introduction of body-worn cameras by the police will reduce any unlawful arrests and use of excessive force. In case the community feels that the arrest made is unjust, they can always report the officer. These will ensure that the police are careful with their work which will build trust with the community.
References
Bratton, William. Murad, Jon. (2018) Precision Policing; Data, discretion, and community outreach can ensure a new era of public safety.
McKnight, Mathew. (2013). The stop and frisk challenge.
Suszan, Brittany. (2017) What is Precision Policing? http://blog.spotcrime.com/2017/05/what-is-precision-policing.html
