NYDailyNews.com

Blogs

SITE BLOGS WEB

Adams, Jeffries Defend Stop-And-Frisk Bill

amd_handcuffs.jpg

Asked today about the NYPD's stop-and-frisk policy, Mayor Bloomberg today pointed to dropping city crime rates and said police use the policy with great caution -- putting him at odds with state Sen. Eric Adams and Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, who are sponsoring legislation to stop the department from keeping a database of information on those who are stopped and then set free.

Said Bloomberg: "Let me remind you, crime is down for the ninth year in a row. We have a slight uptick in murders, but overall crime continues to go down and the numbers are so low in murder that they'll always go up and down a little bit. And the percentages will look big but they are very small changes. We're on track to have our second-best record ever, and maybe since we've got seven months left to go, we can even have our best year ever. And stop-and-frisk is one of the techniques the Police Department uses -- uses it effectively and is very careful to make sure that we don't discriminate against anybody. The stop-and-frisk numbers roughly follow the reporting from witnesses and perps, witnesses and victims, in terms of who gets stopped."

When a reporter noted that the names of people who haven't done anything wrong are still kept on file, the mayor responded, "Just go back and look at what we've been doing. Do you want the 10th year of crime to continue to come down? We're going to continue doing what we're doing."

Adams and Jeffries are calling some serious bull on that one. Read on to see what they have to say...

alg_eric-adams_hakeem-jeffries.jpg

"The mayor doesn't clearly understand what is going on," Adams told me this afternoon. "I've gotta take that position, because I cannot imagine he's saying, 'Subway crime is down; let's keep doing what we're doing.'"

Adams, a former police officer, said those subjected to stop and frisks are overwhelmingly black and Latino. Most "did not commit any criminal act at all, and we're keeping the names in a database to use later? That troubles me," Adams said. "What many people don't understand [is] stop and frisk is not a bad thing. It's a good tool. When it's abused, it's a bad tool... This is one time that there is a uniform voice from the police and civilians saying, 'This is wrong, and black and hispanic youths are the victims of this.'"

Added Jeffries:

"There's no evidence that stopping and frisking hundreds of thousands of law abiding New Yorkers and then entering their personal information into a database (has anything to do) with effective crimefighting, [and] it's hard to argue that when 90% (of those) who are stopped and frisked are let go because there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing, that this practice is necessary."

Jeffries said he's gotten numerous complaints from constituents -- particularly young men -- about being stopped on their way to or from work or school, for example: "I hope Mayor Bloomberg will turn a listening ear to what is being said."

  

Post new comment

Comments (3)

You sure do butcher the english language, famulla. If you ever made sense, I'd fall off my chair!

With a pretty face like yours tell me Celeste and the handcuffed man you have pated, how doy yes how do you feel? Slightly motional or just no feelings at all like the troops those are in Afgghanistan and Iraq and no in Pakistan. Say no more The reporter top shot will fire you I thank you Firozali A.Mulla They pay less and want the stories faster

The Mayor is not in touch on this particular issue. Stop and frisk is an entirely appropriate law enforcement tool when an officer has a reasonable su****ion that criminal conduct is afoot. All too often, however, it is used to target Black and Latino men who are involved with no criminal conduct. If you stop and frisk randomly in a poor neighborhood, sooner or later you will get lucky and find contraband. But the consequences far outweigh the benefit of the one collar.

Some people resent being subjected to an unconstitutional search. When a person protests and challenges the authority of the officer, the situation often escalates. The result is too often an assault or false arrest of a person who engaged in no criminal conduct. It also routinizes contact with law enforcement and the criminal justice system, making it more the norm than the exception.

I am mystified as to why the department would want to keep this information. What they should do is track arrests that do not result in criminal charges or immediate dismissals by a judge.