Pros And Cons Of Stop And Frisk

Stop and Frisk is one of the most controversial police procedures implemented in New York City. This is a limited search where the police officer confronts a person that he or she deems suspicious with the goal being crime prevention. The police officer does this by patting the person down for weapons, as well as questioning the individual. However, the people stopped are predominantly Black and Latino. Many believe that Stop and Frisk is a form of racial profiling. Racial profiling is defined as police action, such as arresting or questioning, which takes place based on a person’s race, ethnicity, or national origin and not merely the behavior of the individual. This is the definition used by Mathis Risse and Richard Zeckhauser in their

The alternative could minimize the use of race so that racial profiling becomes moot. Risse and Zeckhauser respond to this argument by saying utilitarians will always welcome alternatives that effectively curb crime for the benefit of the citizenry (pg.151). This is a convenient way to dismiss an argument, rather than prove the counterargument wrong. It is easier to incorporate the counterargument into one’s own argument. The fact still remains that Risse and Zeckhauser’s utilitarian view on racial profiling is flawed, specifically the expressive harm portion of the

This is an assumption that is proven without evidence. For Risse and Zeckhauser, racial profiling is not a form of racism, nor its resulting harms. The harms are a symptom of expressions that occur in society. Instead, the consequences of profiling are viewed as innocent. The relationship between racial profiling and racism painted by Risse and Zeckhauser is implausible. The individual is required to picture a society where racism plays no role in law enforcement’s use of racial profiling over other plausible ways of responding to racial disparities in crime. It also asks the individual to believe that racial profiling of minorities can be executed fairly in a society that is viewed as racist. Only on these assumptions can an individual make the objection to racial profiling as an objection to racism rather than profiling. Therefore, the harms of racial profiling are identified with racism instead of racial profiling. These assumptions are hard for minorities to grasp. Therefore, Risse and Zeckhauser’s expressive harm depends on an implausible relationship between racial profiling and racism. Racial habits according to expressive harm seem peripheral, thus deflecting attention away from the effects of racial