QueenSt8OfMind

soul ✖ hip-hop ✖ freedom

Search

//

home

Latest Post

Toronto Should Not Amend the “Stop and Frisk” Policy

Posted by queenst8ofmind ⋅ April 23, 2013

Ever since the year of the gun in 2005, which had resulted in a senseless death due to gun violence in Toronto, citizens feel uptight about their safety and police officers are now forced to take action. There are many underlying factors that contribute to the crime that is being committed on a daily basis; however, there are also many steps that can be taken to prevent such incidents from happening. It’s hard to believe that “get tough” policies created by Canadian politicians can deter gun violence from occurring. Therefore police authorities should use their best efforts on implementing an effective procedure or build a communicative way when approaching individuals who violate or are caught in the process of breaking the law. A procedure that many officers do put in place is called carding, better known as the practice of random stops and demanding personal information from someone. When a person is carded by a police officer they must comply by the request and show personal identification, and still some police officers tend to abuse this opportunity on gathering a lead to potential crime. At times police officers will card individuals although there is no real evidence of illegal activity and will assume by a person’s physical appearance that they are suspicious. Another procedure that’s purpose is to approach suspicious individuals and gather information is called “Stop and Frisk”, the only difference is while police officers get to stop and question a person, they are also allowed to search them, which is typically a pat down. Hence, when police officers Stop and Frisk individuals, who look guilty of a crime, there are no specific measures of discretion being used because a justified stop varies depending on the circumstance. For example, it is unfair to stop and pat down an innocent pedestrian who lives in a high-crime area and have them undergo humiliation due to the disorganization of their neighborhood. Furthermore the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure. In other words the Canadian law protects citizens from being subjected to unreasonable searches by police officers and other persons in position of authority. Therefore, Toronto Police officers should not be required to Stop and Frisk individuals because every citizen is entitled to their Charter of Rights under the Canadian law, discretion of officers could lead to racial profiling, and huge increases in Stop and Frisk may increase mass incarceration for minority individuals.

In Canada diversity is visible and should be respected at all times. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights that guarantees certain political rights to all Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada. Under Section 8 in The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states “Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure (Canadian Heritage, Section 8).” In other words authorities must carry on their duties in a fair and reasonable way and must respect an individual’s property and space. The term “search” that is stated in Section 8 defines the purpose of examination, meaning being questioned about a particular content. For example, a police officer does not have the right to search your trunk, but they can question you about contents in a bag in the vehicle. Under the Stop and Frisk procedure, police officers can question to where an individual is going or where they are coming from, although generally everyone has the right to remain silent. If police officers were to implement Stop and Frisk procedures than this would violate an individual’s civil right because police officers would freely get to search one’s personal property under their own suspicion. “They cannot enter private property or take things from others unless they can show that they have a good reason. In most cases, they are allowed to enter private property to look for evidence or to seize things only if they have been given a search warrant by a judge. (CH, Section 8)” It wouldn’t be fair if police were granted the duty to stop decent citizens and conduct a search without permission from a judge, that officer would be breaking the law and wouldn’t be setting a good example for the community. Also, If a police officer has bad judgment and pulls aside a law abiding citizen and finds no illegal items on them, there are no repercussions attached to the officer’s actions and the law abiding citizen must continue with the stigma of being harassed by authority. Stop and Frisk contradicts the overly used motto for Toronto Police, which is “to serve & protect” because you can’t stop and frisk individuals you wish to serve and protect.

Secondly, Stop and Frisk should not be required from Toronto Police officers because it leads to racial profiling in many ways. “Racial profiling is the practice of targeting racial minorities for criminal investigation solely or, in part, on the basis of their skin colour (Richards, 1999).” The main focus behind Stop and Frisk is for police officers to spot out strange, angry, emotional or fearful behaviour from a person, pull them aside and pat the person’s outer clothing to detect if a weapon is being carried. A huge problem with random stops being practiced is that majority of those being stopped and questioned for personal identification are minorities. They tend to be minorities because most citizens who reside in priority neighborhoods have migrated from third-world countries and have low income or are living just above the poverty line. “A Star analysis of Toronto police data from 2009 and 2010 shows that police fill out a greater proportion of contact cards for black people than white (Toronto Police Services; Statistics Canada, 2012). These statistics indicate that even without the Stop and Frisk procedure put in place, those of colour have the most contact with police and are being racially profiled opposed to other races. If black people in general are being asked to fill out contact cards than it clearly means they are being targeted and labeled as “suspicious” or “armed and dangerous”. “A Star analysis of data from 2008-mid 2011, shows that police stop and document black and brown male youth, aged 15-24, more often. And in all patrol zones, the numbers documented are greater than the number of black or brown male youth that live there (TPS; SC, 2012). In other words, statistics show that Toronto Police officers have stopped every coloured youth in the city, and asked them for their personal identification at least once. Stop and Frisk should not be allowed in Canada because every coloured youth would then be stopped and frisked due to their physical appearance. In addition, it is not justifiable to stop coloured individuals due to the suspicion of a police officer. It is only fair that when police officers do suspect that crime is being committed in an area, they must approach the person, regardless of skin colour and identify evidence and a reason for arrest. Also, police officers must be aware of poverty and racism as root causes of some crimes for majority of marginalized youth. For example, if minority youth are found loitering in their local neighbourhoods, it’s highly likely that they were once students who eventually received a suspension from school or there are just no other fundamental extra curriculum activities that they can attend, which means they are more prone to being stopped by police officers and frisked. It is unjust for youth, specifically coloured youth, who live in public housing and already face oppression and challenges outside of society, to undergo being stopped and frisked on a day to day basis because of the location of their home. If the main goal for police officers is to stop all minorities from committing violent crimes, then discriminating against them will never achieve this goal. In reality, there are many underlying factors that contribute to people committing crimes and most of these factors are problems that police officers are not trained to solve. “In each of the city’s 74 police patrol zones, the Star analysis shows that blacks were documented at significantly higher rates than their overall census population by zone, and that in many zones, the same holds true for “brown” people — mainly people of South Asian, Arab and West Asian backgrounds (Rankin 2010)”. This means it doesn’t matter where an individual lives or where they’re travelling to, if they are black they have a higher possibility of getting stopped by a police officer even with no evidence of illegal activity. Stop and Frisk allows police officers to not only take advantage of their discretion but also allows them to abuse their power when dealing with citizens. Stop and Frisk can be beneficial to some police officers if they do happen to seize a weapon or drugs from that individual; however, officers must consider law-abiding minority civilians who feel they are being treated unfairly because they are coloured.

Thirdly, if Stop and Frisk procedures were to increase than there would be a noticeable increase in mass incarceration as well. The suspicion of an officer varies upon the number of years a police officer has worked within his line of duty. In other words an officer who has been on the job for more than twenty years at least, would have a better judgment of what suspicious behavior looks like compared to an officer who has only had five years’ experience. If Toronto Police officers were to stop and frisk each and every individual they come in contact with and charge that person, then correctional institutions would be completely filled with people accused of summary offences. Also, if Canadian politicians seek to increase the burden of punishment as a general deterrence for crime, then a self-perpetuating underclass of non-violent individuals may never be reintegrated due to the lack of flexibility within the Criminal Justice System. Those charged with minor offences should not be forcefully locked up in an environment which serves purpose for serious violent offenders. Therefore, a Stop and Frisk procedure would only attract first time offenders and recreate them into second time offenders because as we all know, jail is a school for criminals, not a school for non-criminals. Also, for individuals who learn from that one mistake, they may not receive a second chance to clear there slate. For example, if a police officer stops and frisks a young man who has almost less than two grams of marijuana, then chances are this young man may be an additional body to the system. If the young man is enrolled in school, he will have to miss school for court, and if he is employed than he automatically is terminated from his job due to his criminal record, and he then must rely on another way to sustain his living, which may lead to more criminal activity. If citizens were to be stopped and frisked every day for petty crimes than eventually they become less and less employable through repeated incarceration and they will only end up creating a habitual dysfunctional cycle. This will not only reflect upon the offender but it also will impact the reputation and economy of Canada. Sooner or later, the costs of building more and more correctional institutions will become unsustainable, as we’ll notice more and more individuals being incarcerated.

In conclusion, Stop and Frisk should not be amended in Canada because every Canadian citizen has the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. The Canadian law protects individuals from experiencing unreasonable searches by police officers, security guards or other persons in a position of authority, which authorities should respect that given civil right. In addition, the practice of stopping “suspicious looking” people and searching them without probable cause can lead to racial profiling. As statistics shown, black and brown males are often stopped at a higher rate than white males, which proves that some police officers practice the acts of discrimination against certain individuals while policing. Although, there may be an increase in gun violence in Canada, there is no factual evidence that Stop and Frisk policies will reduce that particular type of crime. Crime data also does not support the claim that Canada will be safer because of this policy. A mass incarceration can result in the practice of Stop and Frisk because if police officers decide to stop minorities in marginalized areas, than the majority of minorities incarcerated will increase within the Criminal Justice System. Furthermore, if the main objective for Toronto Police officers is to “serve and protect” than Stop and Frisk contradicts their motto because Stop and Frisk abuses the trust between the police and the community, which in reality makes everyone less safe.

RESOURCES