Trump Show Support for "Stop and Frisk"

Stephen Olson

so070712@ohio.edu

                                                             Trump's Inner City Solution

            Whether or not you admire Donald Trump and his supporters you have to admire Trump supporters for being so persistent, even when at times it seems factual that Trump is trying to blow the election. Saying that a “stop and frisk” policy would “worked incredibly well” is more than offensive to just democrats, it offensive to our Constitution and nation’s people as a whole. A stop and frisk policy completely clashes with our First Amendment rights of every citizen and is eerily communistic like in principle.

            Trump openly stated his support for the concept of a stop and frisk tactic to stop violence in black communities on Wednesday night in a mostly black church in Cleveland. “I think you have to [do it],” Trump said. “We did it in New York, it worked incredibly well and you have to be proactive.”

            The reality is that if you performed stop and frisks in every city you would find illegal activity on every kind of person. Not only will black communities be outraged if this strategy were to be implemented, America as a whole will be. This will cause our police to lose support and pay the ultimate price for our coward politicians, ultimately leading our nation in the path of Anarchy. If there is no trust between the people and the police, anarchy will emerge.

            Trump may claim that the stop and frisk policy was effective, but Trump failed to mention the negatives of the programs past. Interestingly enough the stop and frisk policy was originally implemented by now outspoken Clinton supporter and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. This lead to the June 17, 2012 march of several thousand down Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue. The protestors arrived directly at Mayor Bloomberg’s Upper East Side townhouse demanding that an end be put to the program altogether.

            The policing method reached an all-time high tension in 2012 when stop-question-and-frisk protestors who videotaped police stops became the targets of the New York City police. A wanted style posted hung in precinct headquarters, without any allegation of criminal wrongdoing. The police labeled the protestors as “professional agitators” and brought national spotlight to the issue.

            “The city has received both actual and constructive notice since at least 1999 of widespread Fourth Amendmentviolations occurring as a result of the NYPD’s stop and frisk practice. Despitethis notice, they deliberately maintained and even escalated policies andpractices that predictably resulted in even more widespread Fourth Amendmentviolations… The NYPD has repeatedly turned a blind eye to clear evidence ofunconstitutional stops and frisks.” 

            The United States Supreme Court found that in the case of Terry v Ohio that about 684,000 people were stopped in 2011. The court found the NYPD guilty of violating both the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits racially discriminatory policing, and the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.