Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Stop-and-Frisk Policing
View through CrossRef
Stop and frisk is a proactive policing strategy that is widely used by police departments across the globe. In the United States, the origins of stop and frisk are rooted in the English practice of allowing night watchmen to stop and question individuals who were deemed suspicious. This ability to stop and question suspicious individuals serves two primary purposes. First, it gives law enforcement officers the ability to identify individuals who are looking to engage in criminal activity, stop those individuals, and prevent them from committing a criminal offense. Second, it may have a deterrent effect if potential offenders refrain from criminal offending because they do not want to risk being stopped. By the early 20th century, the implementation of stop and frisk in the United States varied by state. The Uniform Arrest Act, proposed in 1942, sought to standardize the practice. While several states adopted the Uniform Crime Act, which stipulated the circumstances under which a stop and frisk could occur, most states failed to do so. The practice of stop and frisk also faced constitutional challenges, with plaintiffs alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures. In 1968, the US Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of stop and frisk. When law enforcement officers can establish reasonable suspicion, they can stop and question an individual. If there is reasonable suspicion to believe that a stopped individual possesses a weapon or poses a threat, law enforcement officers can also conduct a frisk. Stop and frisk has faced significant criticism and has been the subject of several class-action lawsuits, particularly in New York City. First, there is significant concern that nonwhite pedestrians are more likely than white pedestrians to be stopped, frisked, and subjected to the use of force. Next, stop and frisk may reduce perceptions of legitimacy and trust in law enforcement. The practice may also have adverse health consequences for those who are subjected to it or are in fear of being subjected to it. Finally, it is unclear whether stop and frisk prevents crime. It is also important to note that stop and frisk faces these same criticisms in other nations. The literature cited in this article summarizes key pieces on stop and frisk.
Title: Stop-and-Frisk Policing
Description:
Stop and frisk is a proactive policing strategy that is widely used by police departments across the globe.
In the United States, the origins of stop and frisk are rooted in the English practice of allowing night watchmen to stop and question individuals who were deemed suspicious.
This ability to stop and question suspicious individuals serves two primary purposes.
First, it gives law enforcement officers the ability to identify individuals who are looking to engage in criminal activity, stop those individuals, and prevent them from committing a criminal offense.
Second, it may have a deterrent effect if potential offenders refrain from criminal offending because they do not want to risk being stopped.
By the early 20th century, the implementation of stop and frisk in the United States varied by state.
The Uniform Arrest Act, proposed in 1942, sought to standardize the practice.
While several states adopted the Uniform Crime Act, which stipulated the circumstances under which a stop and frisk could occur, most states failed to do so.
The practice of stop and frisk also faced constitutional challenges, with plaintiffs alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures.
In 1968, the US Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of stop and frisk.
When law enforcement officers can establish reasonable suspicion, they can stop and question an individual.
If there is reasonable suspicion to believe that a stopped individual possesses a weapon or poses a threat, law enforcement officers can also conduct a frisk.
Stop and frisk has faced significant criticism and has been the subject of several class-action lawsuits, particularly in New York City.
First, there is significant concern that nonwhite pedestrians are more likely than white pedestrians to be stopped, frisked, and subjected to the use of force.
Next, stop and frisk may reduce perceptions of legitimacy and trust in law enforcement.
The practice may also have adverse health consequences for those who are subjected to it or are in fear of being subjected to it.
Finally, it is unclear whether stop and frisk prevents crime.
It is also important to note that stop and frisk faces these same criticisms in other nations.
The literature cited in this article summarizes key pieces on stop and frisk.
Related Results
Towards the unification of policing innovations under community policing
Towards the unification of policing innovations under community policing
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine how various policing innovations, including problem‐oriented policing, broken windows, intelligence‐led policing, Compstat, third‐par...
Technology in policing, policing in a technological society. Special Issue brief
Technology in policing, policing in a technological society. Special Issue brief
Watson and Huey, in a 2020 article in this Journal, point out that there is still little empirical research offering a practice-focused perspective. This Special Issue responds to ...
Hot Spots Policing
Hot Spots Policing
Since the 1980s, the nature of policing has expanded beyond a person-focused approach to include a location-based approach. Recently developed proactive policing strategies that ar...
Assessing Stop & Frisk
Assessing Stop & Frisk
Abstract
Chapter 8 asks “Is stop & frisk anything new?” Noting that police have always made stops, it places stop & frisk in the context of other policing cr...
Legitimacy in Policing: A Systematic Review
Legitimacy in Policing: A Systematic Review
This Campbell systematic review assesses the direct and indirect benefits of public police interventions that use procedurally just dialogue. The review summarises findings from 30...
THE FUTURE OF POLICING IN NIGERIA: FOCUS ON REFORMS, INNOVATION AND DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY
THE FUTURE OF POLICING IN NIGERIA: FOCUS ON REFORMS, INNOVATION AND DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY
The problem of policing in Nigeria has become one of increasing concern regarding institutional, operational, and legitimacy issues in response to rising levels of insecurity and t...
Integrating GIS and Spatial Analytical Techniques for Smart Policing in Ghana
Integrating GIS and Spatial Analytical Techniques for Smart Policing in Ghana
Crime fighting and prevention has become very challenging in Ghana in this era of technological advancement. The Ghana Police Service (GPS) is the legally mandated institution to m...
Intraoperative imaging, navigation and monitoring
Intraoperative imaging, navigation and monitoring
<p dir="ltr">Neurosurgery involves significant risks due to the intricate anatomy and delicate structures of the brain and spine. Developing techniques to improve surgical ac...

