Stop-And-Frisk Policy Might Cut Violence, Ed Lee Says

John Cote and Heather Knight, San Francisco Chronicle, June 27, 2012

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee said Wednesday he is considering implementing a controversial stop-and-frisk policy similar to that used in New York and other cities, where officers try to reduce violent crime by searching people they consider suspicious in an attempt to seize illegal weapons.

“This is under consideration as a way to make sure that we keep homicides and some of these other violent crime(s) down,” Lee told The Chronicle’s editorial board. “I think we have to get to the guns. I know we have to find a different way to get to these weapons, and I’m very willing to consider what other cities are doing.”

It’s a surprising move for a mayor who has described himself as “a progressive before progressive was a political faction in this town” and who leads what is viewed as one of the most liberal cities in the country.

{snip}

Civil rights groups and others have denounced stop-and-frisk policies in various cities as a racist approach that disproportionately affects Latino and African American residents. Several thousand demonstrators marched through New York’s streets this month to protest the policy.

A recent report by the New York Civil Liberties Union found that the vast majority of people stopped by police there were black or Latino, and that of 686,000 people stopped in 2011, 88 percent of them had done nothing wrong.

{snip}

Lee did not provide details but acknowledged he is considering tactics that “might be edgy” to reduce gun violence, particularly in the city’s southeastern neighborhoods and in public housing projects such as Sunnydale, the scene of four recent shootings.

{snip}

“It’s controversial. I will be tagged—as the minority mayor of this city—for racial profiling,” said Lee, a former civil rights attorney. “But I’m going to let everybody know that if it works . . . I’m going to do something in that direction.”

Lee said he wants to explore the idea after having “a good conversation about stop-and-frisk” with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

{snip}

Lee said he will meet soon with the Rev. Amos Brown, president of the San Francisco chapter of the NAACP, to try to get him and other black ministers to join him in supporting a new policy in the city.

Brown said it’s true that gun violence in the city’s African American and Latino communities is “out of hand.”

But he said he will support a stop-and-frisk policy only if police officers will enforce it without using racial profiling and in a calm, compassionate way.

{snip}

Shawn Richard, a former gang member who now leads the nonprofit Brothers Against Guns in the Bayview, said racial profiling would occur here, too. He’s doubtful that a white person driving through the Bayview would be pulled over under the policy.

“Who does that leave? People of color, right?” he said.

Richard said there are “a lot” of concealed weapons carried in Bayview-Hunters Point and that shootings in the neighborhood are rampant. He shared Brown’s feeling that the policy could prove helpful—but only if it’s applied without regard to race.

{snip}

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • I understand that violent homeless bums used to be an epidemic in San Francisco, but a lot of that has been cleaned up.  Yes, they might be left wingers, but even left wingers want to be safe.  Stop-and-Frisk in New York City is supported and staunchly defended by a Mayor who is a strident left winger relative to the country’s body politic, though he’s “conservative” by New York City standards.

    • Rob

      To my knowledge,violent homeless bumms never were a cause of serious violence,but young BLACKS were constantly shooting and killing innocent people,but that is going all the way back to the 1970s and early 1980s.Anyone else old enough to remember this?(Peejay)

    • Marcy Fleming

       Bloomberg is a total statist. Period. The left-right distinction matters much less than that.

  • Jesse_from_Sweden

    A recent report by the New York Civil Liberties Union found
    that the vast majority of people stopped by police there were black or
    Latino, and that of 686,000 people stopped in 2011, 88 percent of them
    had done nothing wrong.
    ————–
    That means that a pretty impressive 12% actually had done something wrong.
    A better than one in ten chance of the police actually stopping someone that has done something criminal or is in possession of something illegal.

    Pretty frikkin good statistics in my opinion.

    —————–
    Brown said it’s true that gun violence in the city’s African American and Latino communities is “out of hand.”

    But he said he will support a stop-and-frisk policy only if police
    officers will enforce it without using racial profiling and in a calm,
    compassionate way.
    ————-
    So the gun violence is in black and latino communities, but he doesn’t want the police to stop blacks and hispanics?
    Does the man actually think it’s whites who are going to these minority communities and commits this gun violence that is out of hand?

    And a small question not related.
    How do you get text in italics in Disqus?

    • “Latino, and that of 686,000 people stopped in 2011, 88 percent of them
      had done nothing wrong.
      ————–
      That means that a pretty impressive 12% actually had done something wrong.
      A better than one in ten chance of the police actually stopping someone that has done something criminal or is in possession of something illegal.Pretty frikkin good statistics in my opinion.”

      Actually its 1/8 so 1 out of 8 blacks and hispancis were breaking the law.

      • Jesse_from_Sweden

        Actually its 1/8 so 1 out of 8 blacks and hispancis were breaking the law.
        Yeah, I said better than one in ten.

        As for good news, apparently they use instead of [ ] in Disqus.
        Oh well, that should make my posts a little easier to read.

        • Marcy Fleming

           It doesn’t matter because your points are all wrong. Just because these illegal tactics are used against groups you don’t like doesn’t mean it couldn’t be used against you or your family or friends.
          Learn to think in principles.

  • Church_of_Jed

    We want stop and frisk outlawed in all blue precints and states.  Let the reds be racist and the blues get enriched.

  • Sue

    He’s doubtful that a white person driving through the Bayview would be pulled over under the policy.
    “Who does that leave? People of color, right?” he said.

    Who brings in the guns…………..right? I’m doubtful it’s white people.

    • Marcy Fleming

       Really dumb nonreasoning.

  • I think it would be hilarious if San Francisco implemented this policy and then because of P.C ONLY WHITE PEOPLE were stopped!  That might change some “hearts and minds” dont you think?

    • Jesse_from_Sweden

       No, that would change nothing.

      The libtards would think that white people being stopped is only fair, and not react to black people not being stopped, since that would also be fair, since they are discriminated against so much anyways.

      And only stopping whites means it would have very little impact on the gun violence, which would only reinforce the libtards opinion of stop and frisk as something that doesn’t work, and is only used to harass blacks.

      • Marcy Fleming

         Stop and frisk is wrong period because it involves the initiation of force before any crime has been committed.

        • Jesse_from_Sweden

           Except that stop and frisk is used for finding illegal guns and drugs, and carrying those illegally is a crime.

          So they are not initiating force before a crime has been commited, they merely cannot tell before doing the check if you are in the process of commiting a crime or not.

          Or is it your opinion that it is a crime to carry illegal guns and drugs only when the police find them?

          • Such policies are dangerous. If they pass a law making guns illegal, then all weapons will be confiscated. First, they soften you up and get you used to being searched, then they pass the law and take away your “legal” guns.

          • Marcy Fleming

             There shouldn’t be illegal guns anymore than illegal drugs, we need the state out of those businesses altogether and concentrate solely on real crimes like assault, rape, murder, burglary, robbery and fraud.
            They are not stopping people committing crimes, they are stopping people who have committed no crime.
            Obviously this is an improper initiation of force.
            Your last sentence is a nonsequitur. 

  • Shawn Richard, a former gang member who now leads the nonprofit Brothers Against Guns in the Bayview, said racial profiling would occur here, too. He’s doubtful that a white person driving through the Bayview would be pulled over under the policy.
    “Who does that leave? People of color, right?” he said.”

    Right…because no White person in his or her right mind would be driving through that neighborhood!

    •  Except if they’re buying drugs.  Then the cops have a good reason to profile those whites, and they do.

      • Marcy Fleming

         No, totally end the inane drug wars instead.

  • HenryHolliday

    This is very dangerous ground. AmRenners ain’t dumb, you know what I’m saying. The socialists would love to leverage this down the road for gun checkpoints in Everytown, USA.  And that would lead  somewhere that I hope we never have to go to.

    • Marcy Fleming

       Exactly the point I was making to Engelman, don’t get suckered into a socialist police state by the Democrats who created the problem to begin with.

    • Jesse_from_Sweden

       No, it’s not a problem.
      When they are stopping and searching people, they are seaching people for things that are illegal.

      It is not a threat agaisnt legal gun ownership, only laws that change legal gun ownership is a threat to legal gun ownership.

      Enforcing already existing laws isn’t a threat, especially since more and more states are allowing concealed carry licenses.

      And if you have such a license, being stopped and searched doesn’t mean you get punished, because then the gun you have on you is legal and they are searching for things that are illegal.

      So more concealed carry laws (meaning easier for law-abiding citizens to get one, and legally carry a firearm) and more stop and frisks to ensure that those that are now legally allowed to carry a firearm are the only ones that carry firearms.

      Such a concealed carry licence would also work very well when being stopped by police.
      Just announcing to the police that you have such a license, and showing it, means that the police officer not only knows you have a legal firearm on you, but also means that he now knows that you have no criminal record and as such isn’t really a high priority to search for contraband.
      Kind of a symbol that you are a honest and law-abiding citizen.

      • Marcy Fleming

         You have been in Sweden way too long to have such a sheeple attitude towards the police. We have a Bill Of Rights here and Stop & Frisk is a total violation of the 4th Amendment and in line with the Democrat Party philosophy of the Omnipotent State which grants revocable privileges, not rights that are inherent
        and not from government.

      • HenryHolliday

        Your post is civil, so I don’t thing you’re a troll. so my response will be civil as well.
          Ther are many reasons why this is a bad policy. As one example, in some states that have concealed carry, the issuing LE agency puts your name in a database. It comes up when the police run you through the computer system Let’s say a traffic stop for having a tail light out. No matter whaere you get stopped, it’ll list you as as having a CCW permit. What happens next depends on where you’re stopped, and by whom, It can range from teh officer saying nothing at all, to asking if  you have the gun on to, to insisting on taking control of the weapon during the stop, to going to full felony stop just because you’re a pemit holder. But you could be a bad guy armed to the teeth, and if it’s just a traffic stop, firearms wouldn’t even be mentioned because you wouldn’t be in the computer.
          Some LEO’s are against concealed carry and will hassle you, or even look for an excuse to arrest you if you have a CCW.  It can vary not only from state to state, but from town to town.
          Do they have CCW in Sweden?

  • Southern__Hoosier

    Only whites will be stopped. When the police try to frisk a minority without cause, they will scream racist. Minorities know their rights better than whites and will fight for them.

  • Rob

    I remember the Zebra Murders.
    The whole city was on edge.And a lot of killings outside San Francisco.The Po-leece kept a lot of information from us, but they really had to.And there were several killings and attacks AFTER the big break in the case .I met Lou Calabro, who did some of the investigation. A LOT of gory details were never disclosed(Peejay).

    • Marcy Fleming

       As a native San Franciscan I remember that period well, same time as the Patty Hearst drama and neither was stopped by stop and frisk but by legal police investigative work.

  • Kurt Plummer

    Concerned,

    I propose logic along the lines of the refusal to acknowledge that certain diseases may have racial genetics drivers and instead insisting that the disease is ‘regionally associated’ with certain continents.

    In this case, you aren’t profiling the people but the geography where the crimes are occuring.

    Put out the message loud and strong all day long and refuse to be put off of it when the R-word starts getting thrown out there.

    >>
    But he said he will support a stop-and-frisk policy only if police officers will enforce it without using racial profiling and in a calm, compassionate way.
    >>

    Rubbish. Ever tried talking ‘calmly and compassionately’ to a black or hispanic male high on his sense of self?

    Whites respect rational behavior like meeting your eyes, talking in a level voice and one vs. one sets of choices. “I can either take you in for using right now or issue you a ticket for the pipe (paraphernalia) and have you come in later on a lesser charge. Either way you give up the drugs but I don’t have to find them on you and make it a real felony.”

    To an ethny, such understandings of implied influence trading on outcome are alien.

    Anything which is not overtly dominant is weak. And that perception is what instigates the attempt to verbally overpower the opposition argument on the basis of emotional subjugation rather than rational negotiation.

    Blacks get loud. Hispanics get stubborn and vicious.

    The chief honcho at our shelter yells at them to get the hell out and not come back for a day or a month and they get the picture that the **dominance** contest is over. At which point they become submissive (which is not to say without profanity, at volume, on their way out the door).

    Or violent.

    Based on some unmappable set of internal standards, the manager always has friends around to help intimidate the more brutal thugs when he calls them out.

    Cops don’t have the option to be anything but in control of the situation because only by hamstringing a black’s ego can you keep him from continuing to try and win a fight that is over before it’s begun. And a desire to avoid having to use real force keeps the cops in blacks faces. This is why cops are hated by blacks because black culture, as the genes it’s derived from, simply doesn’t respond to less than absolutes.

    I live with the reality of this reality every damn day.

    Give a black everything he wants and he’s a veritable Uncle Tom of garulous good nature. Get in the way of what he perceives to be his and it’s instant switchover to open season hostility.

    Hispanics get bullish or mulish and make elaborate threats before attacking while your back is turned but blacks absolutely cannot be anything but either submissive or dominant. They know no no other behavior state as ‘negotiation’ unless numerically outnumbered.

    What bothers me is more pragmatic: a pistol runs anywhere from 600 to 1,000 dollars, retail. It may be cheaper if it’s somehow stolen from an owner or dumped for resale after a crime.

    But in nothing near the numbers that show up on the streets.

    How then are the poorest neighborhoods coming up with the weapons which drive the stats on ethnic gun crime like this when they are routinely on wall to wall welfare?

    It has _got_ to either be crooked cops selling weapons under the table from confiscations and evidence rooms. Or a high end ($$$$) dealer who has secondary business contacts able to support the crime of illegal importation from outside the country and thus outside our production and registration economics.

    THAT is where you attack. Because it is a distribution locus choke point.

    Comparitiely, this random fishing for felons crap is akin to saying there will be beatings until morale improves. Kill the source, don’t manage the problem.

  • JohnEngelman

    I have been stopped and frisked a number of times by the police. Sometimes they examine packages I am carrying. I do not get angry. I am glad they are doing their jobs. 
     
    A stop and frisk policy is a way of stopping crimes before they happen. 

    • Marcy Fleming

       It’s people like you that cooperate in setting up a police state which given your superstate big government philosophy is not at all surprising but lays a big egg
      here.

    • HenryHolliday

      And what will you do when they knock on your dooor, unannounced, to give your home a monthly “courtesy inspection” to make sure you’re not abusing your children, using drugs, your pets’ vaccinations are all current,and your wiring is up to code? It all comes from the same fountain: search without probable cause or reasonable suspicion.

      • JohnEngelman

        It won’t happen, so I do not worry about it. The police are my friends. 

        • HenryHolliday

          LOL.   Okey-dokey!   Hide and watch.  Personally, I think your tongue is exploring the inner contours of your cheek.    :>)

        • Marcy Fleming

          That’s not something to brag about as the cops are mostly PC and unfriendly to whites now. They could be your enemy tomorrow.

  • Christopher_Nelson

    I don’t care if it is racist or not.  But, I believe that it would violate the 4th amendment.  And that would be bad for whites.

    •  We have enough 4th Am jurisprudence to establish that being out in public doesn’t afford you the same privacy rights as being in your own domicile.

      • Christopher_Nelson

        You can’t randomly stop people and check them. This isn’t Soviet Russia, or Nazi Germany.

        •  You should.  This is Black-Run America.

          As for the politics of the matter, mark this prediction down and throw it back in my face if I’m wrong (and I’m sure all the enemies I’ve made in the last 24 hours will be more than happy to do so):

          The Obama/Holder DOJ will huff and puff about NYC SaF, to placate the Big Chief black preachers, but that’s all they’ll do.  New York City is the keystone of New York State, a big electoral college prize, being perpetually blue, and a whole lot of money for Democrat national politicians comes from Manhattan, whose left-wing luminaries (who also share something else in common) are kept safe by SaF.

          • Christopher_Nelson

            The problem is, that the police  do not care if they infringe on the rights of whites. It happens all the time.  You may think that it’s good for BRA, but it  will back fire on whites and their rights.  Remember that the police are also politically correct alot of the time.  And what if the cop is a minority?

            Yes, the blacks will always vote democrat, but the republicans have been anti-white also.  It would have been better if blacks were never allowed to vote.  Now we have the anti-white party of the democrats, verses the useless party of the neo-cons.  What a choice.

      • HenryHolliday

        We have no statutes or case law that says police can stop and search people who they have no reason to to believe have committed or are about to commit a crime. That is exactly how all the law enforcement agencies in Nazi Germany operated. Search, arrest, imprisonment without due process. And it happened gradually just like it is now, because people sat back and let it happen, because they thought it was for their own good, and because it was at first directed against groups that they weren’t part of.

        • It’s not that they “have no reason to believe.”  They do — Young black and Hispanic men commit around 9 in 10 of the city’s violent crimes.  If the race angle is too hot,  (and it usually is, thanks to strict scrutiny), then they can use age and gender to defend SaF, because age = rational basis and gender = intermediate scrutiny.  All it would mean is that the NYPD would have to SaF more young whites and Asians just to circumvent the whining of the race industry.  Personally, I think strict scrutiny for racial classifications and the disparate impact test need to be written out of the jurisdiction of the Federal judiciary via Federal legislation, using Congress’s plainly listed Constitutional power.

          And there is due process in all this.  If you have no contraband on you, then you’re neither arrested nor given a ticket.  I fail to see how a NYPD cop stopping you and shaking you down then letting you go if you don’t have anything means that you’re somehow depriving someone of life, liberty and property w/o due process of the law.

          Listen, neither one of us like New York City’s almost impossible gun laws.  But if they’re going to have them, they should enforce them on the people most likely to violate them, and in a way where enforcement maximizes public safety.

    • JohnEngelman

      If you are not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear. 

      • Christopher_Nelson

        Yeah, that’s the same line the police use when they try to get you to agree to their unconstitutional searches.

      •  Until they accuse you of doing wrong, and throw you in jail anyway.

      • Marcy Fleming

         Total BS and the whole purpose of this unconstitutional policy is anti-guns in private hands. That is exactly why Bloomberg pushed it in NYC.
        I’ve heard that Engelman brain dead line of nonreasoning used 40 years by the LAPD as an excuse for illegal wiretaps.
        The government is our enemy at all levels and here in San Francisco all the public officials are PC leftwing Democrats.

      • HenryHolliday

        Tell me you’re being sarcastic. If not, we’ll start with who defines right and wrong, and whether the law is becoming more or less opressive.

  • Church_of_Jed

    I’m a racist, so I don’t really care about gun violence in black neighborhoods. Without it, we’d be more endangered. I didn’t wish harm on the little girl, nor am I to blame. Where was her father?

  • Marcy Fleming

     Utter nonsense as the police are now a big part of the problem as they are enforcing the bad legislation giving Blacks preference.

  • Marcy Fleming

     It has never produced any results but disarming the population to be at mercy of the state though I understand why some Nazi types endorse that.

  • How about insisting that blacks act like civilized human being and show some sort of value to human life? Nothing I can do about that, it’s up to the black community to make that a reality.

  • ograf

    What would be the sense if racial profiling is not used ? Let’s take 100 people who were frisked using racial profiling and a hundred that were frisked at random.  Which group will have more  felony crimes ?     duh