Stop and Frisk

Detroit To Begin Stop and Frisk


Credit: Sam Grace Lewis / Foter / CC BY-NC-SA

Despite the fact that New York's stop and frisk was found unconstitutional by a federal court last week, the program is finding a foothold in another city. Detroit, in search of a solution for rampant crime, may implement stop and frisk.

According to The Detroit News, the city's police department hired contractors from The Manhattan Institute and Bratton Group which, "pioneered the practice when they developed New York's stop-and-frisk program." The contractors will begin to integrate the system with Detroit's traffic police. By allowing officers to stop and frisk suspicious individuals on the road the traffic unit will "evolve its mission from principally the issuance of tickets toward the prevention of crime."

A Fox News report says that specific details about the program have yet to be revealed.

Judge Shira Sheindlin, who was responsible for the ruling on New York's program, pointed out that "both statistical and anecdotal evidence" about stop and frisk pointed toward racial profiling. Additionally, she said, "Many police practices may be useful for fighting crime… but because they are unconstitutional they cannot be used, no matter how effective."

Detroit's Assistant Chief of Police, Eric Ewing, disagrees. The chief said that stopping and frisking suspicious individuals is "just being proactive." He also responded to racial and constitutional concerns:

Based on reasonable suspicion, the Detroit Police Department is already a stop-and-frisk policing agency. Detroit's population is mostly African American, so it stands to reason that a high number of African Americans will be stopped, based on reasonable suspicion. This is not racial profiling, just officers doing good constitutional police work.

"It's actually a pro civil rights policy, I would argue," said Heather MacDonald, a Manhattan Institute fellow. She believes stop and frisk "is done to equalize people's opportunities for success, and to make sure everyone has the same right to live in freedom from fear."

Although Detroit's Police Department statistics indicate that crime has dropped 1.62 percent since last year, it has already seen 197 murders this year and is still ranked among the most dangerous cities in the United States.

However, as the New York Times points out, stopping and frisking "only pushes crime to the boundaries of the policed zone." There is no reason to think that Detroit's experience will be any different to New York's. 

NEXT: MA City Councilman Pleads Guilty to Tipping Off Drug Dealers

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. What. the. fuck.

    “It’s actually a pro civil rights policy, I would argue,” said Heather MacDonald, a Manhattan Institute fellow. She believes stop and frisk “is done to equalize people’s opportunities for success, and to make sure everyone has the same right to live in freedom from fear.”

    1. It’s the dawn of the Libertarian Era!


    2. Freedom is slavery, after all.

    3. And to think the MI published a few writings I agreed with but has employees spew such crap…

      1. There’s a lot of good stuff there – unless the topic has anything to do with crime and then it’s all Giuliani worship and let’s toss the Constitution out the window time.

    4. Heather is a fucking simpleton.

    5. Jesus H. Orwellian double-think!

    6. It’s Detroit. Stop and frisk will be aimed at capitalist with too much money in their wallets. It’s about time mugging got a decent euphemism.

      1. It already has one. It’s called civil asset forfeiture.

        1. Austin TX, has highway robbery. Blow a .05 and they give you a ticket, then send you on your way.

  2. But I thought the Libertarian Era was upon us?

    1. Refresh has failed me.

  3. She believes stop and frisk “is done to equalize people’s opportunities for success, and to make sure everyone has the same right to live in freedom from fear.”

    Slavery is freedom.

    1. Look, the Founders stopped and frisked everyone, too. Why do you hate freedom?

      1. No, they just had really frisky parties.

  4. The easiest solution would be to declare Detroilet a sovereign nation. Not only would that void any constitutional concerns, but we could also declare war on it and send in the marines.

    1. Foreign aid!

    2. It would be kind of like Andorra, but shitty.

    3. You think the Marines would go? I sure as fuck wouldn’t. Too much risk, not enough reward.

      1. The Middle East produces a lot of beautiful women to please the eye, Detroit, on the other hand, uhm, Meg White?

    4. Or we could just acknowledge that we were wrong the entire time in the ongoing dispute between us and Canada over ownership of Detroit. Move the customs checkpoints back a few miles and it’s no longer our problem.

      1. I thought we were friends…

  5. One more reason not to go to Detroit. It’s like they just can’t help themselves.

  6. It’s great that libertarians oppose S&F. Absent any probable cause, it’s obviously an egregious violation of the now defunct Bill or Rights. And

    However, the takeaway from Floyd v. NYC for statist pricks is that the practice of S&F has incorporated racial profiling, which makes it unconstitutional. Their fix will be S&F for everybody a la TSA.

    Continuing yesterday’s theme: none dare call it a police state.

    1. Precisely what I thought reading this.

      “If we just do it to everyone, IT’S OK!”


      1. Security is more important than liberty. Besides, as long as you’re not doing anything wrong…

        1. Their fix will be S&F for everybody a la TSA.

          Which is basically how the police fixed their problem of treating minorities like shit in the pre-Civil Rights Era: they just started treating everyone that way. Well, those who didn’t look like they could afford competent counsel.

          Go read the memoirs of ‘lawmen’ from that period, like Charles Askins. Friggin’ psychopath, but he only killed Mexicans so it’s all good.

      2. Stop and frisk a couple of soccer moms having a bad day and see how far this gets.

    2. I call it a police state.

      1. Why is it always a police state? Why not a sheriff state?

        1. Are you questioning my authority?

          1. As an anarchist, you’ve waived any authority. Therefore, no.

            1. Epi – you want me to go and give him a little “authority” on your behalf….voluntarily, of course.

              1. Did you know that anarchist and antichrist almost read the same?

                1. That is like only pointed out in all recruitment literature, ProL.

              2. Authority-splaining?

              3. I give you permission to do whatever you want to him.

                (that includes rape)

                1. You know how people are supposed to have natural rights? You only have unnatural rights.

    3. Well, a few of them (like Matt Ygelsias, who did this when asked the question by Tim Carney) will simply duck the question by asserting that it’s impossible for S&F to exist without racial disparity. There’s a little something to that argument, but if followed consistently one would have to conclude that basically all government programs suffer from that institutional racism.

    4. That will be their takeaway, though the order itself clearly says they would be wrong to think it Constitutionally satisfactory to just make the practice less racist.

  7. By allowing officers to stop and frisk suspicious individuals on the road the traffic unit will “evolve its mission from principally the issuance of tickets toward the prevention of crime.”

    Goatfucking Jesus on a rhinoceros hide trampoline, what an awesome plan.

    1. These dumbshits shouldn’t even mention preventing crime until they solved the ones already committed.

      Detroit’s violent crime rate is nearly five times the national average. Most large cities run higher than the national average, but not five times that average. The police department’s clearance rate (the number of reported crimes that the department claims to have solved) is only 8 percent; again, far below other major cities. The response time for a call to the fire department or police department is 15 minutes, about double the national average.…..684813.php

      1. It’s like all of the movies set in Detroit are coming true, all at once.

        1. Then where’s Robocop? We were promised robotic cops.

          1. He’s coming, just be patient.

          1. I said all of them. Detroit Rock City, Action Jackson, Evil Dead, the works.

    2. They’re feeling like Tom Cruise and Colin Ferrell in a certain pre-crime movie.

  8. Proof that the government of Detroit is racist.

    1. No, they just hate the residents of Detroit. And really, can you blame them?

      1. I’d be surly if I lived there, too

        1. Seeing the people who do live there and how they live in photographs, that’s all I need to be a racist.

  9. That ought to fix any problems with the city.

    1. This is like ED-209 all over again.

      1. You have ten seconds to comply.

  10. Great move, Detroit! This will help! Way to go!

  11. Of course, I assume notorious authoritarian cunt Heather MacDonald is one of the primary driving forces behind this.

    Maybe Michael Grunwald will write a column about how he looks eagerly forward to the day police in Detroit will be allowed to summarily execute shifty looking niggers on the side of the road, because that is a necessary ingredient for a delicious totalitarian omelette.

    1. of course she is. and she’s right about equality of fear. now everyone is equally afraid of being shaken down by armed goons.

  12. Since Detroit does not have any money I guess they don’t have to worry about losing a lawsuit.

    1. “We’ll just give away abandoned blocks instead of cash, that should work, right?”

      1. Better. Detroit can give use whatever the appraised value happens to be when settling.

  13. Did the city investigate any economic suggestions to solve rampant crime?

    1. I daresay there’s no place on Earth that has a worse understanding of economics.

      1. That is one razor-thin margin of win in such a contest.

        1. Yes, I’m thinking of the same runners-up, most likely, but Detroit is the most crater-like at this time.

      2. Washington, DC is as bad. But DC has the federal spigot keeping it afloat. Detroit’s not so fortunate.

        1. They’re like a sadomasochistic couple: They love each other, and that’s how they show it.

  14. Stop and frisk is the future in every city in America. I mean, it’s the present for some cities, but for everyone else, matter of time. That is all.

    1. I shudder to think what will happen if this is ever tried in Seattle. There’s a much higher than average anti-police sentiment here (see: the Battle of Seattle). Stop and frisk would lead to a war in the streets.

      1. Stop and frisk would lead to a war in the streets.

        It would in NYC too – if they did it in Midtown or on Wall Street.

  15. Is government flipping liberty the bird more often now, or am I just paying closer attention?

    1. Is government flipping liberty the bird more often now


      or am I just paying closer attention?

      It doesn’t matter. in Soviet US, attention pays you!

  16. She believes stop and frisk “is done to equalize people’s opportunities for success”

    What does that even mean??

    and to make sure everyone has the same right to live in freedom from fear.”

    Freedom from fear of the police not included, of course.

    1. I say that we nuke the site from orbit; it’s the only way to be sure equalize people’s opportunities for success.

  17. Gun control comes in two flavors– things that are like drug prohibition (and ineffective) or things like are like S&F (and violate the Bill of Rights.) Needless to say, both drug prohibition and S&F are racially biased in implementation.

    Many liberals seem to be against drug prohibition and S&F, worry about the racial bias, and yet favor gun control. *shrug*

  18. Speaking of the “US vs THEM” State, a little while ago on Interstate 90, I saw three or four black Suburbans flying in formation with flashing cop lights escorting a Newell or something similar (also with flashing cop lights). Traffic was stacking up behind them, because the Suburbans were blocking the passing lane, and the giant motor mansion couldn’t maintain speed on the uphill.

    I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a shipment of supervillains en route to a federal supermax.

    I wouldn’t necessarily characterize Joe Biden as a supervillain, but it would not surprise me to hear that’s who was in the bus.

  19. The point of stop and frisk was officer safety. No kidding. It comes from Terry v. Ohio. And that case involved a cop who was alone and confronted a guy in a dark alley in a warehouse district. The case said, while this would normally be out of bounds, we understand you are doing it for officer safety not to get contraband so therefore the practice is okay.

    Now, these cities are admitting that the entire point of stop and frisk is to find contraband and arrest criminals. There is no way this is legal under Terry. They are not even pretending to have any other valid reason to search. The policy is to search anyone at any time based on reasonable suspicion. This is nothing short of probable cause being read out of the 4th Amendment.

    1. And we know that this Court will uphold the bullshit. It’s the new professionalism, after all.

      1. You remember Terry from law school. They got away with reasonable suspicion because it was done in the name of safety not searching for contraband. I don’t see how the justifications given for this don’t turn Terry on its head.

        1. Because criminals are ever more scary, WoD, WoT, WoFreedom. . .the Constitution is a living, breathing document, which is creepy, so it needs to be killed.

          1. I laughed out loud at this, but my fingers are incapable of typing EL-OH-EL.

          2. So, the Constitution is like that tape in Videodrome?

            That *is* fucking creepy…

            1. That would be a great movie. The Constitution, possessed by Thomas Jefferson, goes on a rampage killing government officials.

              1. …ushering in a “Libertarian Era.”

                But, wouldn’t it be Jefferson possessed by the Constitution?

                1. That’s not in keeping with the Living Document of Death concept, now is it?

              2. Shouldn’t that Madison, or Hamilton or Washington? Jefferson had nothing directly to do with the Constitution, he was not in the country at the time.

  20. And my God McDonald is awful. And since if she were an evangelical, that fact would no doubt be mentioned, let me mention that McDonald is a committed atheist rationalist. Go ahead atheists, you own her.

    1. Plenty of awful statist fucks to go around, John. They’re on all sides.

      1. Sure could have fooled me. I thought atheists were all rational freedom lovers.

        And actually McDonald is very sharp about a lot of other things. She is just a scared Manhattanite who wants to police to protect her and knows as a respectable white woman the policy will never apply to her. Somehow, she seems to lack principles in this area.

        1. I was reminded of a quote from old Sam Adams, but it’s possible that she just needs to check her privilege…

        2. They used to be but not so much these days. Movement atheism is now socialist first and atheist second.

          1. The other day I was behind a Prius with various global warming stickers and of course the flying spaghetti monster sticker, because you know that guy really objected to religious thinking. A strict rationalist he was.

        3. Well, to be fair, respectable white women aren’t much of the street crime problem in NYC, or anywhere.

    2. “And since if she were (a member of a group I belong to), that fact would no doubt be (disparaged in some way)”

      Spoken like a true victim.

      1. Spoken like a truly humorless prick. Go fuck yourself if you can’t take as good as you give. Douche bag.

        1. If the topic comes up (I don’t bring it up) when I meet religious adherents, I label myself an atheist so they know I do not think as they do. When I meet atheists, I label myself agnostic so they know I do not think as they do.

          I don’t give a shit about who believes what as long as they don’t try to inject it into my life. I’ll laugh at “atheist rationalists” with you. I just thought it was funny to edit your comment like that.

  21. Does anyone know if damages awarded for civil rights lawsuits are dischargable in bankruptcy?

    1. No. They would be intentional torts and are non dischargable. Same with say a judgement for assault or rape.

  22. Go ahead atheists, you own her.

    In that case, can I use her as bait in my coyote trap?

    1. Sure. It is your ideology. Up to you how you police it.

    2. *snap* *clang*

      Shit, Brooks, I’m caught in this damned thing again!

  23. Lone dissent in Terry v Ohio:

    Justice Douglas strongly disagreed with permitting a stop and search absent probable cause:

    “We hold today that the police have greater authority to make a ‘seizure’ and conduct a ‘search’ than a judge has to authorize such action. We have said precisely the opposite over and over again.”[6]
    “To give the police greater power than a magistrate is to take a long step down the totalitarian path. Perhaps such a step is desirable to cope with modern forms of lawlessness. But if it is taken, it should be the deliberate choice of the people through a constitutional amendment.”[7]

    1. Constitutional Amendment. LOL. No. we just read the Constitution to mean whatever the hell our judges think it should mean.

  24. Detroit’s problem is the city just has too much money. This will solve that with an onslaught of lawsuits.

  25. Where is Sam Beckett when you need him?

    1. Ya know, you’re right: Vladimir and Estragon were rather suspicious looking, loitering around and such…

  26. Speaking of Constitutional literalists, it seems Scalia was in Bozeman recently, talking about the perversion of the Constitution. I wish I’d known. I would have asked him if he thinks he has faithfully applied the originalist intent of the Fourth Amendment.

    New Professionalism, FTW!

    1. I would like to ask him the same thing. Can we apply intent to the 4th Amendment for once.

  27. The freedom from fear? When will they create a heavy handed policy to give me freedom from embarrassment, or freedom from anger? I needz positive freedom and I’ll enslave anyone I must in order to get thems freedomz!!!!

  28. It’s only OK if RoboCop is doing the frisking.

  29. Didn’t S&F start as an anti-terrorist thing in subways? Or am I getting mixed up with some other brilliant plan to protect us?

  30. I wonder, if a cop stopped and frisked the mayor or the police commissioner, would that cop still be a cop 24 hours later?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.