Stop-and-frisk policy is an abuse of civil rights
If the true purpose of New York City’s stop-and-frisk policy is to reduce crime, and it is also true that there is no intentional profiling occurring, then logic would dictate that a certain percentage of Wall Street executives should be asked to spread their legs and lean against a wall or their Porsches and submit to a bodily search. They are as likely to be carrying a weapon as any street punk and they can afford drugs like cocaine, which support the lifestyles of the dealers who may be getting frisked across town.
I appreciate New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly’s position, but if there is not a representative percentage of men in expensive suits being subjected to the blindness of the stop-and-frisk law, then spare the citizenry the hypocritical sanctimony. Kelly has argued that since the larger good is served by abusing the rights of some who use those rights for purposes objectionable to the state, then the ends justify the means. After all, it worked for Adolf.
Robert J. Wegrzynowski