The Stop & Frisk, Identification & Detainment of non-white people by the police is to control the movement of non-white people, and to demean and terrorize them; all of which further the goals of white supremacy. [MORE] and [MORE]. Measures such as "stop and frisk" and "papers please" identification laws aimed at all non-whites 'who look illegal or undocumented' are similar to the various movement restriction and ID measures aimed at Jews during Nazi Germany. Such non-laws were preconditions to genocide.[MORE]
According to Raul Hilberg: "the whole [Nazi] identification system, with its personal documents, specially assigned names, and conspicuous tagging in public, was a powerful weapon in the hands of the police. First, the system was an auxiliary device that facilitated the enforcement of residence and movement restrictions. Second, it was an independent control measure in that it enabled the police to pick up any Jew, anywhere, anytime. Third, and perhaps most important, identification had a paralyzing effect on its victims. The system induced the Jews to be even more docile, more responsive to command than before. The wearer of the star was exposed; he thought that all eyes were fixed upon him. It was as though the whole population had become a police force, watching him and guarding his actions. No Jew, under those conditions, could resist, escape, or hide without first ridding himself of the conspicuous tag, the revealing middle name, the telltale ration card, passport, and identification papers. Yet the riddance of these burdens was dangerous, for the victim could be recognized and denounced. Few Jews took the chance. The vast majority wore the star and, wearing it, were lost." (11) [MORE].
From [HERE] Mayor Michael Bloomberg has often defended New York City’s discredited stop-and-frisk program by arguing that it is necessary to cut crime. That claim was never credible; crime declined in cities that did not detain citizens millions of times over the course of the decade, as New York did, often without legitimate reason. In photo, NYPD Commissioner R. Kelly, who stated that he targeted and focused on Blacks & Latinos because he wanted to instill fear in them that every time they left their homes they could be targeted by police. [MORE]
Similarly, crime is down in New York City, even though new stop-and-frisk data made public last week shows that the Police Department has greatly reduced the number of times officers have stopped and frisked people on the street.
Indeed, the evidence suggests that the department could have reached its public safety goals by using stop-and-frisk legally, when officers had legitimate suspicion of criminal activity, instead of in a way that undermined confidence in law enforcement and violated the Constitution.
Above, White NYPD Deputy Inspector Recorded Telling an Officer to Target Young Black Men Wearing Dark Clothing [MORE]
New York City in 2012 had the lowest murder count in at least 50 years, and it is on pace to have even fewer murders this year. At the same time, the number of stops by police officers has dropped precipitously from more than 200,000 in the first quarter of 2012, the high-water mark of the program, to just over 21,000 in the third quarter of this year. If stops alone were holding back a hidden tsunami of crime, the city would have been overwhelmed by now.
A Federal District Court ruled in August that the tactics underlying the program violated the rights of black and Hispanic citizens, who were disproportionately singled out. Data presented at trial showed that only 6 percent of the stops resulted in arrests.
A new analysis by the state attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, of nearly 150,000 such arrests suggests that they netted few serious criminals. According to the report, only 1 in 50 arrests, or 0.1 percent of all stops, led to a conviction for a violent crime; similarly, just 1 in 50 arrests led to conviction for possession of a weapon. Nearly half of arrests resulted in no convictions because those arrested were never prosecuted; had their cases dismissed; or received an “adjournment in contemplation of dismissal,” which means that the charge is dismissed if the person stays out of trouble for six months or a year.
The collateral costs of an arrest, however, can be disastrous for the person arrested. It can mean losing public housing, student loans or job opportunities. Beyond that, the program wastes the time and resources of district attorneys who have to dispose of the resulting cases. According to the attorney general’s report, the stop-and-frisk era has also seen a dramatic increase in damage claims against the police.
Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio should not abandon stop-and-frisk entirely. Properly used, it can be a valuable crime-fighting tool. But he needs to make sure that police officers know to conduct stops only when they have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, in a manner that complies with the Constitution.