Would Detroit Benefit from Stop and Frisk?

[Wesley Mouch]

I know, right? Let's all say a silent prayer for Wesley.

When you go fishing, don't bitch about what you catch. Just saying...

Thanks for your concern. But I'd appreciate an Anglican ceremony to a silent prayer.

In the meantime, NYC is improving the quality of life for its poorer citizens that Detroit doesn't have or even consider. Carry on, and I'm listening for your prayers.

[TexasT]

I would love for Detroit to be as safe as NYC...but not at that cost. No way.

Let's figure something else out. What we are doing is not working, obviously, but that doesn't mean we have to stoop to that level.

[louis]

DPD is currently trying to push measures to get cops to be more friendly so citizens wont fear/resent them. so i would say that stop and frisk would not be in compliance with the DPD's current policies.

[iheartthed]

Thanks for your concern. But I'd appreciate an Anglican ceremony to a silent prayer.

In the meantime, NYC is improving the quality of life for its poorer citizens that Detroit doesn't have or even consider. Carry on, and I'm listening for your prayers.

Have you ever even been to New York?

[maverick1]

This is a bad idea. And how would this actually work in a city that's 83%-85% Black? Stop and Frisk primarily targets Black and Brown people in NYC. NYC is nowhere near 80%+ Black or Brown. Who are you going to target?

[TKshreve]

While this is not the greatest idea for multiple reasons, it pains me to see the divisive 8 mile rhetoric once more.

Can you blame posters here for throwing spaghetti against the wall on a continuous basis? It is glaringly obvious that Detroit will need some kind of a severe paradigm shift in order to stop it from going further down the toilet. It is also glaringly obvious that Detroit lacks the leaders and enough of the type of citizens required to climb out of the everlasting hole it has dug itself.

Sorry, any small ideas proposed in the past have been exactly that....... small and insignificant. The big ones, like Bing's consolidation proposal have died on the table of complacency every single time.

Detroit's leaders and her people have some very big, very important decisions to make. Until there are some drastic proposals and consistent communication through open forums..... it's just gonna be more of the same ol' shit. Kicking the dead horse.

[Detroit Stylin]

We used to have this...it was called STRESS and I am pretty sure some of the elder forumers can remember what that was like....

[Wesley Mouch]

We used to have this...it was called STRESS and I am pretty sure some of the elder forumers can remember what that was like....

Ah yes... Stop the Robberies, Enjoy Safe Streets

Those were the days.

Today is'd be...

Stop the Murders, Enjoy Safe Sex.

[Bad Brains]

Overall, things are better in Detroit than what you hear. But there remain massive problems to be addressed.

I would have to disagree. Have you driven though the east side lately? Aside from a few good things happening in a few areas/neighborhoods, large parts of the city look worse than ever.

[Drexciya68]

Like things with crooked and corrupt cops weren't worse in the 1980s than decades prior? Things got much worse after 1973. Crooks got the green light from coleman and we saw the results of that years later. In the 1980s cops were robbing, beating up and killing mofos in massive numbers. They were robbing and killing dealers and reselling the dope on the streets. Most didn't step forward after being abused like in times before. Most of the crooks and abusive cops weren't report or they were covered up by coleman's crooked police chief and cronies. Coleman even hand picked a member of STRESS [[his close friend Sgt Harris) to do his dirty work for him. Malice Green? That was coleman's police force,too.

[Bad Brains]

Malice Green? That was coleman's police force,too.

I was only 10 when that happened, but I remember Colman speaking out AGAINST those officers involved.....

[Wesley Mouch]

Like things with crooked and corrupt cops weren't worse in the 1980s than decades prior? Things got much worse after 1973. Crooks got the green light from coleman and we saw the results of that years later. In the 1980s cops were robbing, beating up and killing mofos in massive numbers. They were robbing and killing dealers and reselling the dope on the streets. Most didn't step forward after being abused like in times before. Most of the crooks and abusive cops weren't report or they were covered up by coleman's crooked police chief and cronies. Coleman even hand picked a member of STRESS [[his close friend Sgt Harris) to do his dirty work for him. Malice Green? That was coleman's police force,too.

The attack on DPD's racist attitudes [[which surely did exist) didn't do much for the organization. It may have felt good, and may have been just -- but in the end the population suffered when a mostly honorable and competent police force was politicized.

Good intentions don't always turn out well.

[compn]

stop and frisk? really? thats the best you can come up with?

if detroit had stop and frisk, the criminal element would do what it does now. drive and not walk around to be 'stopped and frisked'. you cant frisk someone in a car.

stop and frisk is responsible for 50,000 marijuana arrests in new york, per year.
you might say 'but detroit is decrim now!' yeah, except for 'public use'.
which is what the cops cite you for after they order you to empty your pockets, like they do in new york. which also has decrim laws on marijuana.
one of the most racist laws i can think of.

didnt bing say a majority of the murders/crime happens in the residential areas?
so you're going to stop and frisk people walking around thier own houses ?
you'd send police to patrol residential areas ?

http://news.yahoo.com/detroit-report...192557311.html

"At least two-thirds of the homicides in Detroit are related to drug sales, disputes between people selling drugs or disputes between people owing people money about drugs," said David Martin, director of the Urban Safety Program at Wayne State University in Detroit.

YOU WANT TO STOP THE MURDERS IN DETROIT?
LEGALIZE, REGULATE, AND SELL THE MARIJUANA IN STORES LIKE ALCOHOL.

everything else is bullshit. enjoy your war on drugs.
"you dont see budweiser and miller having shootouts in the street..."

[compn]

what about ATF Violent Crime Impact Teams in detroit?
http://www.atf.gov/publications/fact...act-teams.html

The 31 VCIT cities are: Albuquerque, N.M.; Atlanta; Baltimore; Baton Rouge and New Orleans, La.; Birmingham, Ala.; Camden, N.J.; Columbus, Ohio; Fresno, Los Angeles and San Bernardino, Calif.; Greensboro, N.C.; Hartford, Conn.; Houston and Laredo, Texas; Jackson, Miss.; Las Vegas; Memphis and Nashville, Tenn.; Mesa and Tucson, Ariz.; Miami, Orlando and Tampa, Fla.; Milwaukee; Minneapolis; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Richmond, Va.; San Juan, Puerto Rico; and Tulsa, Okla.

course, you wouldnt want the local police to be 'federalized'....

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/wat...189464791.html

The review was launched this week after a Journal Sentinel investigation exposed a 10-month federal operation during which an agent's Colt M-4 machine gun was stolen and burglars ripped off $35,000 in merchandise from the agency's phony store.

[1953]

I am in favor of evidence-based policing strategies such as stop and frisk. Maybe if we used more programs that are demonstrated to work, we wouldn't have the insane levels of crime we have in this city.

[Kevgoblue]

Well according to the NYPD's stats, stop and frisk only resulted in arrests 5% of the time. I certainly wouldn't consider that to be an evidence based policing strategy.

Earlier maverick1 commented about the fact that the policy overwhelmingly targets black and brown people, and with the city being 85% black who would the police target.
That may be the most positive factor if a stop and frisk were to be enacted. The overwhelmingly black population of the city would minimize the idea that blacks were being targeted to be stopped based merely on race. Instead of worrying about this, the police could focus their attention on stopping young guys full of tats, with their pants falling down, hanging out at the gas station and sizing up local pastors as they fill up.

[Wesley Mouch]

Well according to the NYPD's stats, stop and frisk only resulted in arrests 5% of the time. I certainly wouldn't consider that to be an evidence based policing strategy.

Kev, the goal of S&F isn't arrests. Its much like a cop walking the beat. By their presence and the knowledge that if and only if you act like a criminal, you can be checked to see if you have a gun and are a threat to others -- you deter gun violence. The goal isn't more arrests, its less crime. S&F shows results there.

Earlier maverick1 commented about the fact that the policy overwhelmingly targets black and brown people, and with the city being 85% black who would the police target.

NYPD has worked diligently to eliminate targeting. Its not permitted. I don't think there's evidence of targeting. Only of who is S&F'd.

That may be the most positive factor if a stop and frisk were to be enacted. The overwhelmingly black population of the city would minimize the idea that blacks were being targeted to be stopped based merely on race. Instead of worrying about this, the police could focus their attention on stopping young guys full of tats, with their pants falling down, hanging out at the gas station and sizing up local pastors as they fill up.

This is a good point -- but I think we would demand that S&F not be applied based on tats or fashion -- but 'loitering' in suspicious locations or manners would be a fine trigger.

This really is much more about a return to a modern version of 'beat patrolmen' with good rules on when they can stop and frisk -- but no longer for the wrong reasons.

[stanman13]

It's always interesting to me when people who so adamantly demand the strictest reading of the second amendment are so willing to give up on the fourth.

As long as its for someone else, of course.

[brizee]

...commissioner said that young black and Hispanic men were the focus of the stops because “he wanted to instill fear in them, every time they leave their home they could be stopped by the police.”

A taste of the nonsense some people are willing to put on others.

[Wesley Mouch]

...commissioner said that young black and Hispanic men were the focus of the stops because “he wanted to instill fear in them, every time they leave their home they could be stopped by the police.”

A taste of the nonsense some people are willing to put on others.

Your conclusion of judgement is based on heresay.

The article in the times quotes a state senator who recounts what the commission said.

Why is that more relevant than the expressed approved of the residents in the area? Hey, its hearsay too. But the statistics show that NYPD is doing a great service to residents beseiged by crime. And they're doing is with tremendous concern to the rights of residents.

Are there occasional errors? Yes. Has at least one police officer misused their power. Sure. Has S&F proven to reduce crime and improve the lives and opportunities of most people? Yes. Do most residents approve of S&F. I think they do.

[iheartthed]

Are there occasional errors? Yes. Has at least one police officer misused their power. Sure. Has S&F proven to reduce crime and improve the lives and opportunities of most people? Yes. Do most residents approve of S&F. I think they do.

Okay, that was funny. You've clearly read barely a paragraph about stop and frisk before you ran here to tout it as a blazing success. You call a policy that has a 94% error rate a success? I'd like to know what you consider a failure.

Despite the police claims that the stops keep criminals and weapons off the streets, only about 6 percent of stops lead to arrests, and last year, only one in every 879 stops turned up a gun.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/op...york-city.html

[coracle]

Of course S and F works. That's why there is such a low rate of arrests. Would be Criminals think twice about going out and about carrying stuff they shouldn't be carrying in case they get stopped.
It's a pity it's needed, but if you really want to reduce crime it is.
Make the system work; not just criticize it because you don't like how it might apply to you.

[iheartthed]

Of course S and F works. That's why there is such a low rate of arrests. Would be Criminals think twice about going out and about carrying stuff they shouldn't be carrying in case they get stopped.
It's a pity it's needed, but if you really want to reduce crime it is.
Make the system work; not just criticize it because you don't like how it might apply to you.

Oh okay. So let's start start stop and frisk in Birmingham, target white males age 15 - 21. We can then conclude that if there is a low rate of arrests then it must be because stop and frisk is working. Pity that it's needed, but it's necessary to reduce crime!

[coracle]

Oh okay. So let's start start stop and frisk in Birmingham, target white males age 15 - 21. We can then conclude that if there is a low rate of arrests then it must be because stop and frisk is working. Pity that it's needed, but it's necessary to reduce crime!

Your comparison is stupid. There isn't a high rate of crime in Birmingham. You only address the problem from the color point of view.It will never be solved that way.

[iheartthed]

Your comparison is stupid. There isn't a high rate of crime in Birmingham.

There isn't a high rate of crime in New York either.