Stop-question-and-frisk
Stop and Frisk is not a regular thing in other cities in the United States but in New York City it is a policing strategy where an individual can be stopped, questioned and frisked without any warrant. The practice was enforced in New York way back in the 1990s to reduce crime rate and is still active. Many New Yorkers have expressed discontent with the law and there have been many complaints of harassment of the minority community. Besides New York’s stop-and-frisk practices has been criticized over racial profiling and privacy rights. So if Mrs. Khobragade is upset about the way she was treated, she should join these protestors and make her voice heard. It is absolutely ridiculous to be asking for immunity because of her status in society. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled stop-question-and-frisk procedures constitutional and so until it is reversed there’s nothing anyone can do about it.
Above all underpaying her nanny less than the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour is unpardonable. The Indian diplomat should remember that if the accusations are proved true, it’s questionable and punishable. She will join the chorus of many similar employers who exploit minorities to get their work done within a meager wage.
Stop-question-and-frisk will always be remembered as a legacy of Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Right or wrong it is one of the most controversial practices that the Mayor Bloomberg’s legacy faces. Even one of the reason the new mayor elect Bill DeBlasio won in the recent New York City elections is his campaign promising that he will reform the stop-and-frisk practice. His election to the mayoral seat with a landslide victory further reinforces what New Yorkers want when it comes to the stop-and-frisk practice. Come January 1 2014, the city folks hope that their brand new Mayor De Blasio will either completely thrash the stop-and-frisk practice or at least reform it.
Withdrawing diplomatic ID cards of US consular officials was an explosive over-reaction and not a sensible response by the Indian government. The tit-for-tat kinda reaction was naive. Worst, all hell broke out when the government got the Delhi Police to remove the barricading outside the US embassy in New Delhi. The question is was this reaction a political campaign toward the 2014 general election?
Well there's some good news for those you say that stop-question-and-frisk is an invasion of privacy and that it leads to racial profiling. The New York City's Attorney General Eric Schneiderman published a report in November 2013 questioning the effectiveness of the policy. And the new mayor elect De Blasio is another hope for change of the policy. Until then, everyone in New York ought to abide by the practice, whether you like it or you not. Or else attend the "Know Your Rights" workshop conducted by a few New Yorkers in the city. This workshop teaches people how to defend their rights without making the situation worse.
Although I defend the stop-question-and-frisk practice, I also believe that it should be carried out only if there is real suspicion. I don’t support it if it is done based on the color of skin, religion, or nationality. If there is a practice that can safeguard my safety and the safety of the city as a whole, there is no reason to oppose the policing practice. And as long as it is done with respect and without intimidation, I see no point to resist or oppose the stop-and-frisk practice. But then since I have never been stopped-questioned-and-frisked, it’s really difficult to say what it feels like to be at the receiving end.
Comments