The New York Police Department - 1733 Words

Citizens of the nation will frequently claim that it is the responsibility of the government or states to safeguard its citizens and uphold the constitution. But what are the citizens supposed to do when these two fundamental philosophies suddenly are set in opposition with each other? In New York, the stop-and-frisk law is designed to protect its citizens, and yet it is taking away their constitutional rights. Although in some instances this method is deemed legal, the New York Police Department has adapted the process into one that stems from criminal profiling. Thus, the two ideologies clash in their views. The right-wing emphasizes how much the violent crime rate has declined. However, the left-wing refutes by asking the vital†¦show more content†¦Following the case, New York decided on a provision authorizing police to stop, question and frisk people on the streets (NYCLU). This became effective in 1971. To further the policy the NYPD created â€Å"UF-250† which forced officers to detail reasons for the stop itself. The policy was mainly used by the Street Crime Unit. With the development of the SCU came concerns and problems. For example, there was a drastic loss of training and observation of stops along with the emphasis on the number of stops. Prior to the expansion of the SCU there was a certain level of supervision by mentors that greatly affected how the policy was practiced. The scope of the SCU allowed for broad training. Having smaller numbers allowed an increased possibility for each officer to have a more experienced officer with them, however, with the expansion of the SCU an increase in the number of officers followed. Many citizens in general believe that there is a certain quota that police officers may stand by, this is the same idea that led inexperienced officers to make excessive stops in order to meet the numbers for the unexpressed quota. Because of a federal law suit against the SCU it was disabled. This also required the NYPD to modify â€Å"UF-250,† which took away the extensive explanation of why the officers pulled people over and replaced them with boxes including descriptors. A long with this new addition to the policy, as