Stop-frisk = profiling?

Yes, but not the kind that is bruited about.

The argument against stop and frisk most commonly advanced is that it amounts to racial profiling. Actually, it amounts to crime-profiling.

Opponents of stop and frisk have claimed that blacks are more likely to be stopped than whites. This is true, and an unfortunate but inevitable outgrowth of the reality that a disproportionate number of blacks commit crimes.

In a Wall Street Journal column several years ago, Heather Mac Donald cites figures that blacks constituted 78% of shooting suspects and 74% of all shooting victims in New York in 2012, despite African Americans making up less than 23% of the population.

It is also the case that crime-riddled neighborhoods in need of more police patrols tend to be minority neighborhoods.

This is from

“Stop and Frisk: The Inner City’s Best Friend,” in Independent Women’s Forum: All issues are women’s issues.

Which looks quite good.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • Matt Bowes  On October 1, 2016 at 11:08 AM

    Good morning, Jim!

    I think that many studies point toward the absence of the father as the main reason for the problems within the African American community. And if this is true, then you cannot “fix” the crime problem unless you address the roots, and those are government policies that discourage the father’s involvement in the family. Stop and frisk is a band-aid, but I don’t believe real change can occur until men–whether the fathers, or outsiders–step up and create a new culture of strong kids and therefore men.

    So, is that something women can affect? I think there needs to be a change in how they make decisions on who they choose as fathers for their kids, or even in whether to have children, something that seems to be tied to economic rewards from local and federal government programs for having children out of wedlock.


    • Jim Bowman  On October 1, 2016 at 11:22 AM

      I’m with you, Matt, except I do not want to make the perfect an enemy of the good. Here-and-now alleviation is something to promote. Before it’s a social-reform issue, it’s a crime-prevention one. These are murders we are talking about, with victims. For right now, we need emphasis on this aspect. It’s a major reason I am with Trump, not Clinton.

      Jim Bowman


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: