Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

Use a New York Street, Go to a Police Database

Matt Welch | 8.17.2009 4:03 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

More troubling scenes from Michael Bloomberg's New York, care of the New York Civil Liberties Union:

The NYPD stopped and interrogated more innocent people during the first six months of 2009 than during any six-month period since the Department began collecting data on its troubling stop-and-frisk program. Police made more than 273,000 stops of completely innocent New Yorkers – the overwhelming majority of whom were black and Latino. Though these innocent people did nothing wrong, their names and home addresses are now stored in an NYPD database. […]

According to an NYPD report obtained and analyzed by the NYCLU this week, police stopped and interrogated New Yorkers 140,552 times between April and June. Nearly nine out of 10 of these stops resulted in no charges or citations. This record number of stops fell disproportionately on the city's communities of color – 74,283 of those stopped were black and 44,296 were Latino, while only 13,906 were white.

The Department made another 171,094 stops between January and March. Overall, this record number of stops represents a 15 percent increase from the 270,937 stops conducted during the first six months of 2008. If stops continue at this pace, the NYPD will conduct a record 610,000 stops in 2009. In 2008, the current record, police stopped New Yorkers 531,159 times.

Over the past five-and-a-half years, New Yorkers have been subjected to the practice more than 2.5 million times – a rate of 1,260 every day. The Department is then recording the name and home address of every person stopped.

Link via Jack Shafer's Twitter page. Jacob Sullum wrote a year ago about New York's "little-noticed crackdown on pot smokers."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Five Laws of the Crazy Tree

Matt Welch is an editor at large at Reason.

Civil LibertiesWar on DrugsMilitarization of Police
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (50)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. John   16 years ago

    But never forget, Nanny State Dems are so much better on civil liberties than Republicans.

  2. Pro Libertate   16 years ago

    Ihre Papiere, bitte.

  3. Medic001   16 years ago

    Well, how else can they kick down their doors for a joint, shoot their dogs, beat up their moms...without their pertanint info?

  4. John   16 years ago

    Pro,

    Give it a couple of years and you will long for only having to produce your papers. The next big thing will be to take DNA samples from anyone and everyone the police happen to interract with. Then they are going to make passports have biometric information on them and collect it everytime you go out of the country and throw it into the mother of all government databases, the database of databases IDENT. With the kind of information sharing that is going on in this country, within 10 years or so 90% of the population will have their DNA and biometrics in one giant searchable set of databases.

  5. Art-P.O.G.   16 years ago

    Ihre Papiere, bitte.

    I'm speechless..the Godwin was actually warranted.

  6. *   16 years ago

    Don't drink!

  7. Art-P.O.G.   16 years ago

    go out of the country and throw it into the mother of all government databases, the database of databases IDENT.

    US-IDent?

  8. Pro Libertate   16 years ago

    DNA? Nah, why bother? We'll have RFID chips implanted in our brains by then.

  9. Warty   16 years ago

    How did the Statue of Liberty's head get to midtown Manhattan? THAT MAKES NO SENSE

  10. John   16 years ago

    No Art. This IDENT

    http://www.dhs.gov/xfoia/editorial_0793.shtm

  11. Pro Libertate   16 years ago

    How did Harry Dean Stanton get Adrienne Barbeau?

  12. SpongePaul   16 years ago

    Does NY have a law that states you must produce ID??? If not then the convo is simple and i am amazed that the new yorkers dont know basic civil liberties

    cop: you come here
    you: yes officer
    Cop; come here what are you doing
    you: walking, thank you have a nice day
    cop: i said come here who are you
    you: Am i being arrested or detained for cause... well then thank you officer have a nice night, and continue walking, at that point they either have to detain and cuff you for cause, and not speaking to another human is NOT cause, or let you go, plain and simple. I have used it in NOLA before with great success.

  13. SugarFree   16 years ago

    How did the Statue of Liberty's head get to midtown Manhattan? THAT MAKES NO SENSE

    The Cloverfield monster threw it there, moron.

  14. Mo   16 years ago

    SpongePaul,
    They take advantage of ignorance of people's rights.

    John,
    You already have to produce papers thanks to the Hiibel case. Guess which wing of the court ruled in favor of having to show ID?

  15. John   16 years ago

    "John,
    You already have to produce papers thanks to the Hiibel case. Guess which wing of the court ruled in favor of having to show ID?"

    So the fact that some court said it could be done relieves Bloomburg of responsibility for this insane policy?

    That is a good example of the kind of atrophy that activists judicary produces. It is not just up to the court to protect our rights. It is up to us. Just because a court says the government may do something, doesn't relieve the shitbags who go ahead and do that something of responsibility.

  16. Art-P.O.G.   16 years ago

    The Cloverfield monster threw it there, moron.

    Ha ha, nice joe'z law, Sugarfree. The proper spelling is moran. You're welcome.

  17. Art-P.O.G.   16 years ago

    Hey, John, I think that's where Richard Kelly got the idea from. Thanks for the link.

  18. Pro Libertate   16 years ago

    Could be Spaceballs.

  19. SugarFree   16 years ago

    Ha ha, nice joe'z law, Sugarfree. The proper spelling is moran. You're welcome.

    You will rue the day. Rue!

  20. John   16 years ago

    ART,

    As you know I am a member of the vast right wing conspiracy. I do a fair amount of work on IDENT. And frankly it gives me the willies. I really don't like that program.

  21. Rue   16 years ago

    Rue?

  22. Chris Knight   16 years ago

    "Rue the day?" Who talks like that?

  23. Mo   16 years ago

    So the fact that some court said it could be done relieves Bloomburg of responsibility for this insane policy?

    The fact that the SCOTUS ruled that it's not a violation of the 4th Amendment is why Bloomberg can get away with it. I have no love for Bloomberg, but the supposedly "strict constructionist" wing of the court upheld stop and identify laws and NY is one of the 24 S&I states.

  24. Drunkenatheist   16 years ago

    Michael Nutter campaigned on a stop & frisk policy here in Philly. Given our murder & shooting rates, most of the city thought it was the most awesomest thing evar, and I'm pretty convinced it was the biggest reason he won the Democratic primary. I don't know what happened to the policy; last I heard, the ACLU was reviewing it to see if there was any way it could work. I think it wound up falling to the wayside, which isn't surprising considering that Philly is broke and City Council is considering a bunch of temporary tax increases. (This includes, IIRC, a sales tax increase of one percentage point, which would bring us up to 8%. Hey Dems, way to support poor people!)

  25. Ska   16 years ago

    "Rue the day?" Who talks like that?

    Stewie Griffin. And SugarFree.

  26. Gunboat Dipolmacy   16 years ago

    ""Rue the day?" Who talks like that?"

    iCarly's nemesis.

  27. Gunboat Dipolmacy   16 years ago

    I'm a huge fan.

  28. Paul   16 years ago

    This record number of stops fell disproportionately on the city's communities of color - 74,283 of those stopped were black and 44,296 were Latino, while only 13,906 were white.

    I only have one minor quibble with this approach. News agencies will compartmentalize this as a racial profiling problem, not a civil liberties problem. Ie, it's not the searches we have trouble with, it's that they fall disproportionately on people of color. I understand that the NYCLU frames the story this way because the mainstream media brain is wired to only think in these terms. But still...

  29. Pro Libertate   16 years ago

    Paul,

    By giving white males civil liberties, you but ensure their dominance over historically oppressed minorities.

  30. John   16 years ago

    Good point Paul. Their sollution will be to just search a bunch more white people so the numbers even out. Somehow that doesn't make me feel any better.

  31. Pablo   16 years ago

    John--not sure if they'll go so far as to search more white people, at least not wealthy or middle class ones. The police here in Atlanta love to stop and frisk poor black people for no good reason. If they tried that shit in affluent, white neighborhoods then voters would demand the police chief's head on a platter.

    Or maybe I'm too optimistic?

  32. Nipplemancer   16 years ago

    racists

  33. Craig   16 years ago

    But I thought random police stops of peaceful civilians and requests for "your papers, please" were exceedingly rare, and libertarians were wildly exaggerating their rate of occurrence based on a few high-profile cases, like the recent heavy-handed detention of Bob Dylan for walking down a New Jersey street!

  34. T   16 years ago

    like the recent heavy-handed detention of Bob Dylan for walking down a New Jersey street!

    Bob Dylan deserves it. Quit bitching on his behalf.

  35. Me   16 years ago

    Craig | August 17, 2009, 6:06pm | #

    But I thought random police stops of peaceful civilians and requests for "your papers, please" were exceedingly rare

    Matt's post mentions only New York City, where about one in 15 people might be stopped this year. It makes no mention of the country as a whole, most of which is small-town or rural. I doubt that one in 15 people are being stopped in Mayberry or Danfield. So yes, I'd say that, statistically, measured nationwide, police stops of the sort mentioned in the post are indeed rare.

  36. Paul   16 years ago

    I heard zat Bob Dylan's papahs ver not in ordah.

  37. Me   16 years ago

    Not that Bloomberg isn't a tool.

  38. Tulpa   16 years ago

    Uh, didn't Hiibel just say that laws requiring you to tell the police your name were constitutional? I don't recall it saying that laws requiring you to produce identification documents were OK.

  39. Me   16 years ago

    Yes.

  40. HeadTater   16 years ago

    It seems that one would almost have more rights in 1960s era Ukraine.

  41. Doctor Duck   16 years ago

    I'm a bit confused about the scary "in a database" reference. What's in this database besides a name and address, which are already in that big "phone book" database?

    Not that I'd cooperate, but -- what am I missing here?

  42. JB   16 years ago

    I often criticize retards for playing the race card, but this shit validates some of it. I mean WTF.

    I wish more people in NYC carried a gun just for situations like this and said "No officer, you have no right to search me. Go about your business, and if you refuse to, you are under arrest." If they refuse arrest, put a few holes in them and then cut off their head and shit down their throat and deliver it to Bloomberg's office.

    That's change I can believe in.

  43. brotherben   16 years ago

    For some reason I'm picturing JB as the tall bald bucktoothed biker on Wildhogs.

  44. Fluffy   16 years ago

    Paul,

    By giving white males civil liberties, you but ensure their dominance over historically oppressed minorities.

    Was this mockery? Because it's actually true.

    This data is not about asking people for identification. This is about stop and FRISK.

    Stopping minorities while letting whites walk on by means that arrests that arise from the stops will fall more heavily on minorities, even when illegal conduct is indulged in equally across racial lines [like marijuana possession, for example].

    You don't think that has a huge impact on the future social status of the people stopped, vs. the people not stopped?

    Think of it this way: if one additional guy was randomly stopped outside Columbia University on a day when he had a joint in his pocket, we'd have a different President of the United States right now.

  45. Paul   16 years ago

    Stopping minorities while letting whites walk on by means that arrests that arise from the stops will fall more heavily on minorities, even when illegal conduct is indulged in equally across racial lines [like marijuana possession, for example].

    You don't think that has a huge impact on the future social status of the people stopped, vs. the people not stopped?

    Of course it does, but that doesn't change my original point. If you're only stopping black people unconstitutionally, and our 3-ring-circus media (Washington/Environment/Race) can only find this to be a race problem, in the end, we're all equally fucked.

  46. Kolohe   16 years ago

    SpongePaul,
    They take advantage of ignorance of people's rights.

    John,
    You already have to produce papers thanks to the Hiibel case. Guess which wing of the court ruled in favor of having to show ID?

    It's not (only) ignorance of one's rights, it's the professed stance that if you don't do what the nice officer tells you, you may wind up with more holes in your body than you started out the day with.

  47. Abdul   16 years ago

    Last time I was in NYC, a cop asked for my ID. I told him that I was Snake Plissken. And he just said, "I heard you were dead," and let me go.

  48. TrickyVic   16 years ago

    Ghuliani 911 started this crap. And some people were trying to call him libertarian.

  49. Fluffy   16 years ago

    I think at some point we have to ask ourselves why, exactly, NYC got its outsized reputation for increased safety.

    After all, in statistical terms, the drop in crime NYC experienced was not that much greater than the drop in crime rates experienced EVERYWHERE in the US over the same period. But even though crime was falling by about the same amount everywhere, most Americans defied the statistics and felt less safe, while New Yorkers went against the grain and felt more safe.

    Now, maybe New Yorkers are just more reasonable than all other Americans, so they had the correct reaction to the statistical change while everyone else had the wrong reaction. That's one possibility.

    Or maybe, just maybe, New Yorkers felt an outsized reaction to the statistical decline in crime because the decline in crime was accompanied by a decline in the number of visible young male blacks and hispanics, as those young male blacks and hispanics were imprisoned for trivial and victimless crimes - and because the police could routinely be seen administratively harassing the young male blacks and hispanics that remained. So the "extra safety feeling" arose because affluent New Yorkers didn't have to see as many scary dark faces, and because affluent New Yorkers were confident that a jackboot was pretty much permanently affixed to the neck of the young dark people they COULD see. The "police theatre" of abuse of people of color may have leveraged the impact of the actual statistical increase in safety.

  50. TrickyVic   16 years ago

    """I think at some point we have to ask ourselves why, exactly, NYC got its outsized reputation for increased safety."""

    What make you think it's outsized?

    NYC got a hell of a lot safer over the last 18 years. That's a fact.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Alton Brown on Cultural Appropriation, Ozempic, and the USDA

Nick Gillespie | From the June 2025 issue

James Comey's Deleted '86 47' Instagram Post Is Obviously Protected by the First Amendment

Billy Binion | 5.16.2025 4:48 PM

New Montana Law Blocks the State From Buying Private Data To Skirt the Fourth Amendment

Joe Lancaster | 5.16.2025 4:05 PM

Trump's Tariffs Are Sapping Small Business Optimism

Autumn Billings | 5.16.2025 12:00 PM

Andor Is a Star Wars Show About the Brutality of Bureaucracy

Peter Suderman | 5.16.2025 10:10 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!