89% of pedestrian stops by the New York Police Department involve non-white persons. The Dept. asked that a study be conducted by the RAND Center on Quality Policing (CQP) to help the New York City Police Department understand the issue of the predominance of pedestrian stops and identify recommendations for addressing potential problems.

This book analyzes New York City’s stop-and-frisk data both pre- and post-constitutionality ruling, examining the existence of both profiling and unequal treatment among the three largest groups identified in the database: Blacks, Whites, and Hispanics. The purpose for using these two time periods is to determine which group(s) benefited the most from the ruling. This research goes beyond standard statistics to identify the place that race holds in contributing to the stop disparities. Specifically, this research will adds a spatial element to the numbers by analyzing the determinants of stop location by race, applying a principal component analysis to a mixture of census and stop-and-frisk data to determine the influence of location on stops by race. The results present a way of determining the plausibility of stops being the product of racial profiling–or just a matter of happenstance.

Since the 1990s, stop and frisk activities have been a cornerstone of the New York Police Department (NYPD). The manner in which the NYPD has carried out stop, question, and frisks (SQFs), however, has been a focal point of discussion, resulting in public outrage and two major lawsuits. Recently, the Federal District Court Judge ruled that the NYPD was engaging in unconstitutional stop-and-frisk practices that targeted predominately Black and Latino New Yorkers. Questions surrounding the NYPDs SQF practices have almost exclusively focused on racial and ethnic disproportionality in the rate of stops without necessarily considering what transpired during the stop. This study will fill that void by examining the prevalence and nature of use of force during those stops, along with testing the minority threat hypothesis. By combining micro-level measures from the NYPDs 2012 "Stop, Question, and Frisk" database with macro-level variables collected from the United States Census Bureau, the current study examines police use of force in the context of SQF activities. The results should help judges, policy makers, police officers, and scholars understand the nature of police use of force in the context of SQFs.

Canvasses 3 different perspectives on "stop and frisk" (S&F) police activity in NY City. Provides the legal definition of, and constitutional parameters for S&F encounters. Considers S&F from the perspective of both the N.Y. City Police Dept. (NYPD) and minority communities that believe they have been most affected by the use of S&F. S&F is also examined as part of the NYPD's training regimen and from the point of view of officers who have used the technique. Provides an assessment of the S&F tactic from the perspective of persons who have been "stopped," and commentary from persons who have observed the tactic's secondary effects. Comprehensive!!

Proactive policing, as a strategic approach used by police agencies to prevent crime, is a relatively new phenomenon in the United States. It developed from a crisis in confidence in policing that began to emerge in the 1960s because of social unrest, rising crime rates, and growing skepticism regarding the effectiveness of standard approaches to policing. In response, beginning in the 1980s and 1990s, innovative police practices and policies that took a more proactive approach began to develop. This report uses the term "proactive policing" to refer to all policing strategies that have as one of their goals the prevention or reduction of crime and disorder and that are not reactive in terms of focusing primarily on uncovering ongoing crime or on investigating or responding to crimes once they have occurred. Proactive policing is distinguished from the everyday decisions of police officers to be proactive in specific situations and instead refers to a strategic decision by police agencies to use proactive police responses in a programmatic way to reduce crime. Today, proactive policing strategies are used widely in the United States. They are not isolated programs used by a select group of agencies but rather a set of ideas that have spread across the landscape of policing. Proactive Policing reviews the evidence and discusses the data and methodological gaps on: (1) the effects of different forms of proactive policing on crime; (2) whether they are applied in a discriminatory manner; (3) whether they are being used in a legal fashion; and (4) community reaction. This report offers a comprehensive evaluation of proactive policing that includes not only its crime prevention impacts but also its broader implications for justice and U.S. communities.

In the last two decades, the New York City Police Department's (NYPD) practice of stop-and-frisk has been the subject of intense public debate and litigation for its disproportionate impact on minorities. In 2013, United States District Court Judge Shira A. Scheindlin ruled in Floyd v. City of New York that NYPD's stop-and-frisk policies violated the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law. Judge Scheindlin's decision relied heavily on evidence of the disparate impact of stop-and-frisk on black and Hispanic pedestrians. Similarly, all academic and policy analysis of potential biases in NYPD's stop-and-frisk practices to date has focused on these two minority groups. This paper expands this body of research by evaluating the effect of stop-and-frisk on individuals from certain national origins. Specifically, my research focuses on nationalities that have been classified as "ancestries of interest" (AOI) by NYPD since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. According to media reports, NYPD has focused its post-9/11 counter-terrorism surveillance programs on neighborhoods in the city with concentrated populations of individuals from twenty-eight AOI. These AOI are comprised of national ancestries from predominately Muslim countries. Using NYPD stop-and-frisk data from 2003 through 2011, I test whether the AOI population in a police precinct is a statistically significant predictor of the annual number of stops in the precinct while controlling for crime rates, other demographic characteristics--including gender, age, race, and the foreign-born population--and socio-economic indicators. I find a positive, statistically significant relationship between the AOI population and the number of annual stops in a police precinct. These results suggest that NYPD's use of stop-and-frisk has disparately impacted AOI individuals and that the city should consider national origin, in addition to race, as it works to reduce the potential for bias in stop-and-frisk practices moving forward.

Broken Windows policing through the utilization of Stop, Question, and Frisk has been widely used by the New York City Police Department (NYPD) since the 1990s, as guaranteed by landmark Supreme Court Case Terry v. Ohio (1968). As a result, hundreds of minority citizens have been the victim of routine stops for minor offenses through this aggressive police tactic. This study utilizes 2017 NYPD Stop, Question, and Frisk Data to determine whether broken windows policing, through stop, question, and frisk, operates as a mode of racial control for African Americans in New York City. Through the utilization of chi-square analyses, binary logistic regression, and multi nominal logistic regression, statistically significant associations were found for several variables based on race.