5 ms·

Stop and frisk reduced crime rates. It should be brought back.

by billy99k 9mo ago

axus 9mo ago
According to Mayor Bloomberg; a politician is always going to say their policy worked.
Psillisp 9mo ago
Public executions too
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
0x1ch 9mo ago
An unmarked car pulls alongside you, all men are masked inside and the windows tinted. You're ready to fight back or run, but then it turns out it's the police attempting to harass and bully you. Wonderful.
- jweir 9mo ago
  Look up Sean Bell - not a stop a frisk, just an open fire. Once, my wife and I were stopped, but not frisked, and cited for riding bikes, on a sidewalk at 2AM on a stretch of Atlantic Ave that would kill you to ride on. It made no sense, until I found out that my neighbor and his friend had been murdered at a street party. There was a drag net out trying to find the killer and they stopped anyone for anything. A tough city.
afavour 9mo ago
Crime rates reduced during the time stop and frisk was implemented. But when it was removed, crime rates remained low: https://www.brennancenter.org/media/5670/download https://www.brennancenter.org/media/5670/download Strongly suggests correlation but not causation.
- cyberax 9mo ago
  Yes, crime decreases tend to stick. Chicago started with similar conditions as NYC (30 murders per 100000 in 1991), but they didn't have no-nonsense mayors like Bloomberg and Rudy. So its murder rate now is still 5 times that of NYC. Broken window policing and stop-and-frisk absolutely worked. Stop-and-frisk was found to be unconstitutional, but it also was highly effective.
  - tptacek 9mo ago
    CPD generally does whatever NYPD does. The difference is that New York isn't Chicago. Different geography, different forces at work. Peter Moskos wrote a whole book about how NYPD turned things around in the 1990s, and "stop and frisk" and "broken windows", whatever Malcolm Gladwell wants you to believe, don't feature prominently in it.
    - cyberax 9mo ago
      Chicago had tried Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS) in 90-s it was so famous that even I heard about it during my lessons on urban planning. In Russia. And it was not entirely unsuccessful, but definitely much less effective than policing in NYC. I read multiple articles from both conservative and progressive sources about the drop of crime in NYC. The evidence is decidedly mixed. "Broken windows" policies probably helped a lot during the 90-s but lost their efficacy by the early 2000-s. Stop-and-frisk probably reduced the rate of serious crimes, mostly through incidental arrests but undermined some of the community trust. It also was unconstitutional.
      - tptacek 9mo ago
        Again, I think, read the Moskos book. It's good, it's new, and it's about exactly this topic.
        cyberax 9mo ago
        Well, I bought it. It's a jumbled mess. I obviously haven't read it completely yet, but I read the parts that mention "Broken Windows". So far they seem to basically affirm everything I said: > Now Bratton had some success in Transit, and well-publicized success, because he decided to stop people from jumping over the turnstiles. It was rampant. They wound up locking up some guy who had like $10,000 and a gun and couldn't be bothered to pay the dollar subway fare. The idea was, if I keep these guys out of the system, crime will go down. And crime went down in Transit, which is why Bratton got Boston and why he got back here. It was like, "This guy might be on to something." > Operation Alternative > But you can use the Broken Windows theory. Stopping a guy for drinking beer gave you a chance to run him for a warrant. Is he wanted for a violent crime? Stopping a guy for pissing in the street gave you a chance to issue a summons. Which meant if he couldn't produce ID you could bring him into the station, run his prints, and then find out he was wanted for one of last week's shootings.
kingkawn 9mo ago
Ok let’s start with you, up against the wall
catlifeonmars 9mo ago
Where’s the evidence?
UncleMeat 9mo ago
Imprisoning all men between the ages of 15-30 would reduce crime rates. It'd also be a monstrous policy. Civil rights are important.

Stop and frisk reduced crime rates. It should be brought back.

axus 9mo ago

According to Mayor Bloomberg; a politician is always going to say their policy worked.

Psillisp 9mo ago

Public executions too

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

0x1ch 9mo ago

An unmarked car pulls alongside you, all men are masked inside and the windows tinted. You're ready to fight back or run, but then it turns out it's the police attempting to harass and bully you. Wonderful.

jweir 9mo ago
Look up Sean Bell - not a stop a frisk, just an open fire. Once, my wife and I were stopped, but not frisked, and cited for riding bikes, on a sidewalk at 2AM on a stretch of Atlantic Ave that would kill you to ride on. It made no sense, until I found out that my neighbor and his friend had been murdered at a street party. There was a drag net out trying to find the killer and they stopped anyone for anything. A tough city.

afavour 9mo ago

Crime rates reduced during the time stop and frisk was implemented. But when it was removed, crime rates remained low: https://www.brennancenter.org/media/5670/download https://www.brennancenter.org/media/5670/download Strongly suggests correlation but not causation.

cyberax 9mo ago
Yes, crime decreases tend to stick. Chicago started with similar conditions as NYC (30 murders per 100000 in 1991), but they didn't have no-nonsense mayors like Bloomberg and Rudy. So its murder rate now is still 5 times that of NYC. Broken window policing and stop-and-frisk absolutely worked. Stop-and-frisk was found to be unconstitutional, but it also was highly effective.
- tptacek 9mo ago
  CPD generally does whatever NYPD does. The difference is that New York isn't Chicago. Different geography, different forces at work. Peter Moskos wrote a whole book about how NYPD turned things around in the 1990s, and "stop and frisk" and "broken windows", whatever Malcolm Gladwell wants you to believe, don't feature prominently in it.
  - cyberax 9mo ago
    Chicago had tried Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS) in 90-s it was so famous that even I heard about it during my lessons on urban planning. In Russia. And it was not entirely unsuccessful, but definitely much less effective than policing in NYC. I read multiple articles from both conservative and progressive sources about the drop of crime in NYC. The evidence is decidedly mixed. "Broken windows" policies probably helped a lot during the 90-s but lost their efficacy by the early 2000-s. Stop-and-frisk probably reduced the rate of serious crimes, mostly through incidental arrests but undermined some of the community trust. It also was unconstitutional.
    - tptacek 9mo ago
      Again, I think, read the Moskos book. It's good, it's new, and it's about exactly this topic.
      - cyberax 9mo ago
        Well, I bought it. It's a jumbled mess. I obviously haven't read it completely yet, but I read the parts that mention "Broken Windows". So far they seem to basically affirm everything I said: > Now Bratton had some success in Transit, and well-publicized success, because he decided to stop people from jumping over the turnstiles. It was rampant. They wound up locking up some guy who had like $10,000 and a gun and couldn't be bothered to pay the dollar subway fare. The idea was, if I keep these guys out of the system, crime will go down. And crime went down in Transit, which is why Bratton got Boston and why he got back here. It was like, "This guy might be on to something." > Operation Alternative > But you can use the Broken Windows theory. Stopping a guy for drinking beer gave you a chance to run him for a warrant. Is he wanted for a violent crime? Stopping a guy for pissing in the street gave you a chance to issue a summons. Which meant if he couldn't produce ID you could bring him into the station, run his prints, and then find out he was wanted for one of last week's shootings.

kingkawn 9mo ago

Ok let’s start with you, up against the wall

catlifeonmars 9mo ago

Where’s the evidence?

UncleMeat 9mo ago

Imprisoning all men between the ages of 15-30 would reduce crime rates. It'd also be a monstrous policy. Civil rights are important.