Politicker » Stop and Frisk

The New York Times Slams Bloomberg’s Charges of Racial Bias

Colin Campbell — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:59:52 -0400

Mayor Bloomberg. (Photo: Getty)

Earlier today, Mayor Michael Bloomberg harshly criticized the media, specifically The New York Times, for giving insufficient coverage to murder victims of color while editorializing against NYPD policies like stop-and-frisk.

"Four days after Alphonza Bryant’s murder went unreported by The Times, the paper published another editorial attacking stop-question-and-frisk,” Mr. Bloomberg said, referencing a recent slaying in the Bronx and claiming a white victim would have received more attention. “They called it a ‘widely loathed’ practice. … Let me tell you what I loathe. I loathe that 17-year-old minority children can be senselessly murdered in the Bronx and some of the media doesn’t even consider it news.”

Well, it seems The Times can push back. And in a sharply-worded statement, New York Times Company communication director Danielle Rhoades Ha told Politicker that Mr. Bloomberg was simply trying to "deflect criticism" from his own administration's controversial policies.

“Mayor Bloomberg is trying to deflect criticism of the City’s stop-and-frisk practice by accusing The New York Times of bias," Ms. Rhoades Ha said in a statement. "Among those critical of the practice is The New York Times editorial board, which is separate from the news side of the newspaper. The Times aggressively covers violence in the city's neighborhoods, and to select one murder as evidence to the contrary is disingenuous."

She added, "His claim of racial bias is absurd.”

Jumaane Williams: There’s A ‘Nugget of Truth’ in Ray Kelly’s Pol Criticism

Colin Campbell — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:38:25 -0400

(Photo: NY1)

"I'm talking about political leadership, they're not out there talking about the problem," NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly said on Inside City Hall last night, defending his department's use of the controversial stop-and-frisk policy. "They're not out there talking about, 'Hey, we have a lot of young men of color shooting each other.' You don't hear that spoken about openly. You do hear unhappiness with the tactics and strategies that we use."

The host, Errol Louis, interjected to argue that elected officials do indeed talk about violence, and not just problems with the NYPD, causing Mr. Kelly to retort, "Well, you're not reporting it. They do report it when they criticize the police though, certainly on New York 1."

And it turns out that one of the chief critics of the NYPD's current tactics, Councilman Jumaane Williams, agrees, sort of.

"Obviously I think there is some things the media should do better and must do better to get this message across," he said on the Brian Lehrer Show this morning. "But the commissioner knows about these events. As I said, that 'Not in My Hood' march actually had to get special permission from his office because we needed a special permit."

Mr. Williams proceeded to argue that Mr. Kelly himself should be attending events highlighting violence in his neighborhood and others.

"He doesn't come out to these events even when invited," he said. "Now you have funerals for people like Zurana Horton, who died a hero, meaning shot protecting children. That was the perfect event for the commissioner to show up."

"There is a nugget of truth in the commissioner's comments," he added later. "I do believe some more leaders need to do more to step up and speak out. The problem is that the commissioner has an audacity to say that because he is not even listening to those of us who are speaking out."

Political Opponents Of Stop And Frisk Explain Why And How They Want The Policy To End

Hunter Walker — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 09:00:42 -0400

Reverend Al Sharpton at the march to end stop and frisk.

Among the thousands who turned out to march down Fifth Avenue in protest of the NYPD's stop and frisk policy Sunday were several prominent political opponents of the practice, which saw police stop over 685,000 people, the vast majority of whom were people of color, while collecting 780 guns. Likely candidates in next year's mayoral election have focused on reforming some elements of the controversial policy, but many of the leaders who participated in the march explained to The Politicker that they want stop and frisk ended entirely.

"I don't know how you can keep it and take the quotas and the profiling out of it and, therefore, I think they need an entirely new program. I don't know how you mend something based on quotas and race," said Reverend Al Sharpton, one of the organizers of the march.

The NYPD has consistently denied quotas or racial profiling play a role in the policy, though a record number of citizens were stopped last year. According to the NYCLU 88 percent of the people stopped last year were totally innocent and 87 percent were black or Latino.

Mr. Sharpton has not yet decided who to back in the mayoral race, but he said the candidates' positions on stop and frisk would figure prominently in his decision.

"A lot of what we support will be based on this and other issues," he said.

Brooklyn Councilman Jumaane Williams, who has been an outspoken critic of the policy, said he believes many of the mayoral candidates need to "stay with the pack" and that "some have been much stronger than others" on this issue, though he declined to name names.

"This issue of reform on stop and frisk is kind of a misnomer, because inherent in a police officer's job is their ability to stop someone if they feel there's reasonable suspicion to do so. Nobody wants to take that away ,what we want to take away are the abuses and the racial profiling," said Mr. Williams. "Call it however you want, the current policy needs to end. You call it reform, you can call it an end. What I'm saying is, the way the police are doing business, the way people are stopping people just because they are black or latino is what needs to stop. So, I'm not going to get caught up in who's saying what as long as theyre saying this behavior, this policy as it currently exists needs to end."

Earlier this month, Mr. Williams was part of a delegation of City elected officials who traveled down to Washington D.C. to bring their concerns about stop and frisk to Congress and the Department of Justice. Sources told The Politicker Attorney General Eric Holder expressed his interest in conducting an investigation during a meeting with members of the delegation. Mr. Williams said he was confident the DOJ would take action on the issue in spite of the controversies currently surrounding the department.

"I think the Department of Justice seemed to be very interested in doing something, we were discussing what that something would be," he said. "I'm hoping they'll kind of honor what they said and follow up with us and I have no reason to believe that they won't."

Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, who is running for Congress in Brooklyn's 8th district echoed the sentiment racial profiling is the main problem with the current stop and frisk policy.

"The Supreme Court has said that stop and frisk is constitutional, the question that we face here in New York is having it conducted in a manner that complies with the law," said Mr. Jeffries. "Many of us believe that stop and frisk as it's implemented consistently violates the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution. It completely inappropriately subjects large communities to racial profiling and leads to the persistent violation of civil rights and civil liberties. That's the problem with stop and frisk as it currently exists."

Mr. Jeffries also said he believes a potential solution lies with the Department of Justice.

"The Department of Justice needs to step in and conduct a patterns and practices inquiry, even if it's preliminary in nature, to evaluate whether the NYPD is engaging in consistent violations of the civil rights and civil liberties of hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers every year," Mr. Jeffries said. "I think the Justice Department is in a strong pos to do so. The Office of Civil Rights is charged with conducting inquiries into civil rights violations allegedly occurring as a result of police department behavior. The Department of Justice has conducted such police inquiries in Detroit, Newark, San Juan and other cities across the country. They should come into New York City.

Comptroller John Liu is the only major likely mayoral candidate who has called for the stop and frisk policy to be ended altogether. He declined to answer when we asked why he thought the other probable candidates don't share his position.

"That's a question you have to ask them," he said. "The stop and frisk tactic, it just doesn't make sense in a democratic society, that nearly a tenth of the population will be stopped and frisked, almost all of whom have done nothing wrong. And because almost all the people that are being stopped and frisked are people of color, this is racial profiling and racial profiling's not accepted even by the NYPD."

Mayor Bloomberg and the police department have continually said the stop and frisk policy is one of the factors behind the declining crime rate in New York. Mr. Liu disputes the notion stop and frisk makes the City safer.

"It's a tactic that has created huge divisions between communities and the police, thus making it unsafe for everybody. The numbers don't really show any significant reductions in murder or signifcant increases in numbers of guns being taken off the streets," said Mr. Liu. "It's causing great pain and humiliation for too many people. Other cities have seen significant reductions in crime without employing these kinds of stop and frisk tactics. Let's figure out what they're doing and bring those strategies to New York City."

For his part, Mr. Sharpton also took note of the fact Rodney King, whose 1991 beating at the hands of the LAPD sparked the Los Angeles riots, died on the same day as the march against stop and frisk.

"I worked with Rodney King in '92. I marched for him and about four weeks ago, he came to New York, did my radio show and my television show," Mr. Sharpton said. "We talked a lot about how things were done then and I think it's ironic on a day that we raise a question of police abuse is the day we lost Rodney."

Thousands Gather To Protest NYPD’s Stop-and-Frisk Policy

Margaret Nickens — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 08:35:27 -0400

The protestor who identified herself as Christina Gonzales was handcuffed and carried to a police van.

After two hours of marching, the crowd was tired of being quiet. Beginning at 3 p.m. Sunday, the diverse group of activists silently trudged nearly 30 blocks down 5^th avenue, solemnly protesting the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy. Nearly 40,000 people came to the protest in solidarity with Trayvon Martin, Sean Bell and other victims of allegedly racist policing practices, according to Derek Turner, a NAACP spokesperson.

Around 5 p.m., the protestors reached 79^th street, the planned ending place for the march due to its proximity to Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s home. Pin-adorned, sign-touting demonstrators began to restlessly pack into the street and sidewalks surrounding the area. No longer pleased with the stubborn quietness of the event, a few anxious protestors began to chant; they were barely audible in such a large crowd. Eventually, two men took over with the assistance of the microphone yelling, “We can’t be silent. We’ve got to fight back. The killer cuffs us. We’ve got to fight back.”

The remaining crowd joined in, demanding an end to the “new Jim Crow” and insulting the “racist cops.” As one officer passed through the crowd, a young girl directed her chants at the cop. He simply shook his head and muttered “dumbass” as he emerged from the throng of people. Otherwise, the police officers remain stone-faced as they watched from the periphery.

A half-an-hour later, the officers began to urge the protestors away from the streets onto the sidewalks. Tensions rose quickly and eventually a scuffle broke out between a young women and a few officers. She was quickly dragged away from the scene as the other marchers screamed angrily, calling the officers “wife beaters” and chanting “shame” at the top of their lungs.

The police eventually pushed the belligerent crowd onto the sidewalk, but a young woman identifying herself as Christina Gonzales emerged, demanding to see her sister, perceivably the other young woman who had been taken away minutes before. The other marchers backed Ms. Gonzales, and it appeared as if the group pressed forward, attempting the escape the police barricade and reenter the streets. Ms. Gonzales was then carried by three officers into a police van. One other woman was also detained.

According to the Huffington Post, nine people were arrested.

The protestors were incredulous. To many, the arrests were confirming their allegations of police brutality and racism.

Despite the arrests, many attendees were stilled pleased with the outcome of the march. Brandon Cuicchi, a member of Queer Rising, said the protest was “fantastic.” “There was a lot of solidarity from a lot of different groups,” he said. Nearly 300 groups participated in the march, including members from Occupy Wall Street and the N.A.A.C.P.

Rita Kamani-Renedo, a member of the New York Collective of Radical Educators, is an 11^th and 12^th grade teacher who attended the rally to support her students, many of whom are stopped-and-frisked daily on their way to school.

“It creates an environment where they feel that their lives and their bodies aren’t valued at all,” she said, noting that the policy unnecessarily puts some students on a life-long track to incarceration.

Constancia Romilly, a retired member of the New York State Nurse’s Association, said the policy is an “emotional assault against our community.” As a nurse, she said she has seen the negative long-term psychological impacts of the stop-and-frisk policy.

Others who attended the march had first hand experience with stop-and-frisk. Dinah Admes’ son was a victim of Operation Clean Halls, which allows the NYPD to patrol apartment buildings in high-crime areas. He is now involved in the NYCLU lawsuit against the city to end the policy.

The protestors claimed the NYPD was racially profiling stop-and-frisk victims. Some touted signs proclaiming, “You can’t have capitalism without racism” or “Down with racism and bigotry.” One man wore a striped prison suit and a sign that read, “How Bloomberg and Kelly see blacks and latinos.”

The policy is “criminalizing entire communities,” said Amanda Alexander, a member of the Bronx Defenders.

Even those with family members in the NYPD marched against the policy. Tami Claytor, whose father, uncles and cousin all served on the force, said she is not against the policy but is “tired of injustice.”

The organizers of the march included Rev. Al Sharpton, N.A.A.C.P. President Benjamin Todd Jealous and George Gresham, the president of Local 1199 of the Services Employees International Union. The silent march was modeled after a 1917 NYC protest that followed race riots in East St. Louis, Illinois.

“When tens of thousands of people march and are silent, the focus is on the people. We wanted to make sure that the solemnness, the seriousness of the occasion, came through,” Mr. Jealous told the Times.

Despite calls for reform, Major Bloomberg has maintained that the policy helps reduce crime in the area. At the Christian Cultural Center in Brooklyn Sunday morning, he continued to tout the benefits of stop-and-frisk, though admitting that the program and the relationship between the community and the police could be improved.

“It makes us feel inferior. It makes us feel subjugated,” said Annam Choudhry, a Muslim youth who attended the protest. “It makes us feel less free.”

NYPD Spokesman Says Stories Of Reporters Arrested At Occupy Raid Were ‘A Total Myth’ [Update]

Hunter Walker — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 09:24:50 -0400

Ray Kelly

NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly and his top spokesman, Paul Browne, gave a lengthy, exclusive interview to the Queens Chronicle in which they discussed one of the biggest controversies surrounding the Department in recent months--the arrests of journalists during last November's raid on the Occupy Wall Street encampment in Zuccotti Park. Mr. Browne apparently denied reports of journalists arrested at Zuccotti Park and attributed them to protesters using fake press credentials.

"Paul Browne, the deputy commissioner for public information, who accompanied Kelly to the interview, added that only one journalist was arrested during the operation, despite stories to the contrary, which he called 'a total myth,'" wrote Chronicle Editor in Chief Peter C. Mastrosimone. "Occupy Wall Street protesters were forging press credentials in an effort to get through the police lines, he added, but that doesn’t mean actual reporters were arrested."

The Department received widespread criticism for its treatment of journalists during the raid. At the time, Mayor Michael Bloomberg's spokesman, Stu Loeser, disputed reports of widespread arrests, but he admitted five credentialed reporters were arrested--three from the Associated Press and two from DNAInfo (for those keeping track, that's a four hundred percent increase over the number cited by Mr. Browne).

Update (6/8/12 4:36 P.M.): We asked Mr. Loeser and Mr. Browne to explain the difference between their numbers and Mr. Loeser responded and explained to us why he thinks "there's no discrepancy."

Update II (6/8/12 6:58 P.M.): The NYPD now says there were actually two reporters arrested during the raid.

Mr. Kelly also addressed two other major NYPD controversies--stop and frisk and the Muslim surveillance program. He said stop and frisk is "saving lives" of "mostly young men of color" and described the Muslim surveillance program as perfectly legal calling the Associated Press' Pulitzer Prize winning series that brought the issue to light "dangerous" and "unfair."

Eric Holder Discussing Plans For NYPD Stop And Frisk Investigation

Hunter Walker — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 16:04:22 -0400

Members of the delegation of New York elected officials in front of the U.S. Capitol Building.

A delegation of elected officials from New York is currently in Washington D.C. to express their concerns about the NYPD’s controversial stop and frisk policy and ask the Department of Justice to investigate the program as a civil rights violation.

Multiple sources have confirmed to The Politicker that Attorney General Eric Holder met with leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus yesterday to discuss the issue. A source on Capitol Hill also told us that, at that meeting, Mr. Holder expressed his interest in investigating stop and frisk.

Officially, Mr. Holder and the Department of Justice have not made any decision about whether they will investigate the program, which resulted in a record 684,330 people being stopped last year, the vast majority of whom were minorities. Councilman Jumaane Williams, who was part of the delegation that traveled to Washington, told The Politicker the Department of Justice is considering several options.

"It seems to be more a question of finding a way for them to do something than if they will do something," Mr. Williams said. "I was asking for them to do three or four things; a full investigation of the NYPD, being an intervener or filling an amicus brief or letter of support when it comes to the litigation against stop and frisk or to help us and find some way to support us on any of the legislative solutions were working on on the city and state levels. They didn't balk at any of it, they're interested in all of it."

Mr. Williams also said there were "no commitments made" and that the Department of Justice seemed to be looking for options other than a full-fledged investigation.

"One thing they said is that an investigation can be very lengthy and they might want to do something sooner rather than later," said Mr. Williams.

Mr. Holder previously discussed a potential stop and frisk investigation when he was questioned about the policy by Bronx Congressman José Serrano.

"We have looked at a variety of, 18 is the number now, of police departments who have engaged in practices that are inconsistent with the way in which they're supposed to serve the people that they represent," Mr. Holder said. "If we find that this is a problem in New York, it is something that we will investigate. It is something, at this point, that I don't think that we have an open investigation, but it is not something that we are not cognizant of."

If Mr. Holder does launch an investigation into stop and frisk, it will not be his first investigation of the NYPD. In March, he launched an investigation into the department's controversial Muslim surveillance program.

As of this writing, neither the NYPD or the Attorney General's office has responded to requests to comment on this story.

New York Politicians Take D.C. Road Trip To Push For Stop And Frisk Investigation

Hunter Walker — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:01:58 -0400

Members of the stop and frisk delegation including State Senator Adriano Espaillat, Councilwoman Mellissa Mark-Viverito and Assemblyman Karim Camara meeting with officials in Washington.

A number of New York City and State elected officials are in Washington D.C. this afternoon to address their concerns about the NYPD's controversial stop and frisk policy. They are calling on the Department of Justice to investigate the NYPD's use of stop and frisk as a civil rights violation. The NYPD stopped a record number of people last year, the vast majority of whom were minorities.

“New Yorkers are fed up with this policy that continually targets our communities,” Assemblyman Karim Camara, Chairman of the New York State Black Puerto Rican Hispanic and Asian Legislative Caucus said in a statement. “The numbers tell a tragic story. One recent report said that more young black men were stopped than actually lived in the city. We cannot get away from the fact that there is implicit racial bias in this tactic used by the NYPD. Since City officials refuse to listen, we are taking our cause to Washington. It’s time for some high-powered back up to advocate for the civil rights of New Yorkers.”

The delegation is holding closed-door meetings with members of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, Congressional Black Caucus, Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Congressional Progressive Caucus. They also delivered a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder.

“Last year alone, New York City Officers stopped 684,330 people under the stop-and-frisk policy. This amounted to a 14 percent jump from the previous year. Even more shocking is the 600 percent increase in stops made since the data collection began in 2002," the letter said. "Most of those who are stopped are not arrested or even issued a summons; further igniting concern that the policy amounts to nothing more than racial profiling and harassment.”

Members of the delegation included Mr. Camara, Congresswoman Yvette Clarke, New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman, Congressman Charlie Rangel, Mr. Rangel's primary opponent in the 13th District, State Senator Adriano Espaillat, Councilman Jumaane Williams and several other members of the State Legislature and New York City Council.

"'Stop and Frisk' is an assault on the civil rights of New Yorkers," said Mr. Espaillat, who is Chair of the State Senate's Latino Caucus. "It harms law and order by creating distrust between police and local communities; it violates the civil liberties of individuals who are stopped without rhyme or reason; and it violates every notion of justice and due process our society is built on. The Federal Government has an important role to play in protecting the rights of citizens and we are calling on the Justice Department to step in and stop this unconstitutional and unjust practice from continuing."

Frisky Business: Once Again, Police Practices Matter In Politics

David Freedlander — Wed, 30 May 2012 04:57:17 -0400

One afternoon earlier this month, Bill de Blasio, the city’s public advocate and a potential mayoral candidate, held a press conference on the steps of City Hall to unveil a new report and suggest a modest reform. The New York Police Department has seen the number of people it has stopped and frisked skyrocket, often without yielding any evidence of a crime. Mr. de Blasio suggested the agency simply record the number and location of their stops, just as they record murder, thefts and rapes under CompStat, the computerized police accountability system that is credited with keeping the city’s plunging crime rate low.

A few hours later, Howard Wolfson, Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s deputy mayor for communications and an old pal of Mr. de Blasio’s from their days on the Hillary Clinton Senate campaign, sent out a blistering response.

“When Bill de Blasio last served in the city’s executive branch there were 2,000 murders a year,” he said, referring to the public advocate’s tenure under former Mayor David Dinkins, a mayoralty that has lived on in the memory of Bloomberg’s supporters as a warning about the dangers of an unchecked bleeding heart lefty presiding over City Hall. “Today we are on track to have less than 500—a record new low. Mr. de Blasio may be nostalgic for the days when the ACLU set crime policy in this city, but most New Yorkers don’t want rampant crime to return ... Make no mistake, we will not continue to be the safest big city in America if Mr. de Blasio has his way.”

The next day, Mr. de Blasio arranged another news conference to denounce Mr. Wolfson’s denunciation of him.

And so it has gone: With the 2013 mayoral election still over a year away, stop-and-frisk has emerged as one of the most important and fraught issue in the early days of the campaign.

Manhattan borough president Scott Stringer has been out front on the topic for nearly a year, visiting 19 churches and delivering a major address on the issue alongside Newark Mayor Cory Booker. (Privately, supporters of his scoff that Mr. de Blasio only jumped in once Mr. Stringer made it an issue.)

“Scott was out there early and pushing the issue; I’m happy about that,” said City Councilman Jumaane Williams of Brooklyn, who is neutral in the 2013 mayor’s race and whose own arrest at last summer’s West Indian Day Parade by police unaware of who he was served to spark a call for reforms.

But it is not just the two of them. A week after Mr. de Blasio’s series of pressers, Council Speaker Christine Quinn—whose status as the early frontrunner has been solidified by her implicit vow to carry on the legacy of Mr. Bloomberg and by her current ability to wring concessions out of the other side of City Hall—coaxed out of Police Commissioner Ray Kelly a series of reforms that included greater training for officers. Then, John Liu, the city comptroller whose fundraising scandal threatens to derail his own mayoral ambitions, called for the practice to be outright abolished.

“This is not what a democratic society is about,” he told The Observer. “It smacks of martial law.”

Organizers are planning a massive protest on Father’s Day, hoping thousands of New Yorkers will turn out for a silent march up Fifth Avenue. George Gresham, the president of the powerful labor union 1199/SEIU, recently announced they couldn’t “ever support anyone who wants to be in the leadership of New York City if they are not speaking out against this policy of stop-and-frisk.”

For Mr. Wolfson, it is this desire that is motivating the denunciations of the administration’s police practices.

“You have a group of candidates running for office who know that they need to appeal to 40 percent plus one in a Democratic primary electorate—which is a very small percentage of people in this city—and they have positioned themselves accordingly, aided and abetted by the ACLU and The New York Times editorial board,” he said. “Anyone who is now running for mayor will have to pass the New York Times test on stop-and-frisk.”

He decried the fact that a “very small minority of people will decide who the next mayor is,” and suggested that a “credible Republican candidate” would be necessary to keep the contenders from promising to return the city to the scarred 1970s. (Remember, this is a man who used to advise Hillary Clinton.)

To Mr. de Blasio, such a response is “unbelievably off topic.”

“It was not mature, not serious,” he said. “It was name-calling, and by the way, strangely old-school. It was like something you would have heard in the 1980s national political discourse. To accuse someone of being so close to the ACLU? That is strangely out of time.”

Mr. Stringer concurred. “I resent that so much,” he said. “I grew up in this city all my life. I was here in the 1970s. I was here during Son of Sam. The A Train was a rolling crime scene. Nobody wants to go back to that, including me. But there are ways to be both tough on crime and smart on crime.”

There is little doubt that the NYPD has been stopping more and more New Yorkers on the street—ostensibly in the search for illegal handguns—questioning them and in many cases searching their cars or their pockets, and that the increased number of searches has not led to a corresponding increase in arrests. Last year, police collected 780 guns after stopping over 685,000 people. In 2003—back when the city’s crime rate was dropping, rather than stabilizing—police recovered 604 guns while only stopping 160,851 people. Mr. Bloomberg defended stop-and-frisk, as if his legacy depended upon it. He counts over 5,000 fewer murders in the city due to the practice (a number arrived at comparing the murder rate over the last ten years with the ten before, a period that includes the crime-ridden early 19990's.) When an editorial in The New York Times called on the administration to be more like Philadelphia and curb the practice, Mayor Bloomberg shot back, “I just have to wonder what kind of world they are living in.”

The phrase stop and frisk has come to stand as a catchall for overzealous policing, but none of the candidates, including Mr. Liu, actually believe that the NYPD doesn’t have the right and the duty to stop someone they suspect of being a criminal. The current number, they concede, is too high, but they are unanimously reluctant to name a more appropriate figure. They call for a series of reforms that nibble around the margins instead, including greater oversight of the practice and more community policing. The City Council has proposed that police officers leave a business card with their name and rank with all suspects who are stopped but found to have nothing on them.

Politically, it is unclear how the issue will play out when voters go to the polls next summer. A recent Daily News poll found support divided, with half of the respondents finding the practice legitimate police work that keeps the city safe, and the other half calling it “racially insensitive.” Most of the opposition to the practice is centered around the poor, minority neighborhoods where the practice is most widespread, votes that seem most likely to go to Bill Thompson, the city’s former comptroller and the only African-American candidate in the race. (Mr. Thompson has been much more muted on the subject than his competitors, telling The Observer in an interview only that he thought the issue would play out in the mayor’s race as part of a broader discussion of policing issues.) All of the candidates expect that to change, as the practice grows more and more widespread, even if the notion of being pulled over by the police remains an abstract prospect for most white New Yorkers.

If there is significant oppo-sition among white voters to stop-and-frisk, it would mark a sea change in the way New Yorkers think about public safety. Since the days of Mr. Dinkins, and before, being called soft-on-crime meant a trip to political purgatory. And there hasn’t been anything like the Abner Louima incident or the Amado Diallo shooting that has galvanized popular opposition to the police.

“It is amazing. Stop and frisk has become police misconduct times 10,” said Mark Green, the former public advocate who made former Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s oversight of the NYPD a central issue in his 2001 mayoral campaign.

“You have to be pretty smart to figure out exactly the political gains or costs. Are there some minority voters who are infuriated that this is happening to their neighborhood kids, and some white liberals who feel their ideology is being violated for no good purpose? Yes, yes. But whether that number is 2,500 people or 25,000 people, no one will know. And that number remains the difference between going to City Hall and going to political Palookaville—where I am,” he added.”

dfreedlander@observer.com

twitter.com/freedlander

Roundup: We Didn’t Make It An Issue

Colin Campbell and David Freedlander — Fri, 18 May 2012 18:29:14 -0400

Even more details emerged about Christine Quinn’s wedding tomorrow. (She’s nervous.)

Right-wing editorial boards and bloggers swooped in to defend Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin from Chuck Schumer.

Mike Bloomberg on Stop-and-Frisk: “We don’t racial profile.”

Elizabeth Crowley’s campaign, profiled.

She appears to be getting her marching orders from the PBA.

Do more isolated state capitols lead to more corruption?

Christine Quinn will be attending an anti-stop-and-frisk march next month.

Lincoln Restler will need to improve on his 2010 performance to have a shot at reelection

Dan O’Connor announced a web ad.

Kevin Parker isn’t enamored with the New York State Democratic Party.

Grace Meng picked up a local union.

A campaign finance group is targeting eight state senators.

Tom Allon defended stop-and-frisks.

“Who is Dr. Robert Mittman?”

New legislation could make it harder to add historic districts in Queens.

Mitt Romney and his wife gave their own campaign $150,000.

The Eagle Forum doesn’t think its a good thing that minority births are out-stripping white births, since “they do not share our values.”

A look at what Mitt Romney’s Day One plan would really do.

Kathleen Sibelius spoke on the separation of the church and state.

Did Mitt Romney kill Americans Elect?

It’s hard to find a Democrat in North Carolina who thinks that Obama will win there.

Joe Biden doesn’t blame people in West Virginia for voting for a convicted felon over Barack Obama.

And Biden on same-sex marriage: “We didn’t make it an issue”

John Liu Calls for Stop-and-Frisk’s Abolishment as Mayor’s Office and Bill de Blasio Spar

Colin Campbell — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:24:08 -0400

> on January 27, 2012 in New York City." src="http://nyopoliticker.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/nypd-getty.jpg?w=300&h=300" alt="" width="210" height="210" />
(Photo: Getty)

As the news cycle spirals around President Barack Obama coming out in support of gay marriage, news surrounding stop-and-frisk politics has also come cascading down after Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, a potential candidate for mayor in 2013, upped his criticism this afternoon. Notably, Comptroller John Liu, also a likely mayoral candidate, has gone one step beyond his rivals, who have argued that some stop-and-frisk tactics should remain as a police tool, and called for the policy to end completely.

“While it is true that stop-and-frisk has gotten some guns and criminals off the streets, it’s also true that stop-and-frisk continues to deepen the chasm between communities and police, relationship that is vital to maintaining a safe and secure city for all New Yorkers," Mr. Liu said in a statement today. "Stop and frisk should be abolished."

Mr. Liu, who also said the policy "creates an atmosphere akin to martial law," offered light praise for Mr. de Blasio's latest efforts, adding, “I certainly support the Public Advocate’s call for an internal examination of NYPD’s stop and frisk practices.”

Meanwhile, Mayor Bloomberg's office slammed Mr. de Blasio's record on the issue, putting out a harshly worded statement of their own from his communications director Howard Wolfson.

“When Bill de Blasio last served in the City’s Executive branch there were 2,000 murders a year. Today we are on track to have less than 500 – a record new low," he said, referring to Mr. de Blasio's service in former Mayor David Dinkin's administration. "Mr. de Blasio may be nostalgic for the days when the ACLU set crime policy in this city, but most New Yorkers don’t want rampant crime to return."

Mr. Wolfson vowed to continue the current policies as well.

"The fact is Stop, Question and Frisk keeps guns and other weapons off the streets and saves lives," he continued. "Make no mistake, we will not continue to be the safest big city in America if Mr. de Blasio has his way.”

Mr. de Blasio's office, of course, had their own rebuttal from his spokesman, Wiley Norvell.

“That’s a defensive, knee-jerk response from Bloomberg’s City Hall that has lost sight of the community trust needed to ensure public safety," he said, contending Mr. de Blasio's plan will increase public safety. “As usual on issues like this, the Mayor’s people have chosen to repeat a big lie instead of confronting the facts."

The other top mayoral candidates, it should be said, have also supported changing current stop-and-frisk policies, but they have't quite generated [or enjoyed?] the same level of push back from Mr. Bloomberg's office as Mr. de Blasio did today.

View Mr. Liu's full statement on the issue below:

“When 700,000 people are stopped and frisked each year in this city,and 9 out of 10 have done absolutely nothing wrong, the mantra of Courtesy, Professionalism, and Respect becomes dubious. It creates an atmosphere akin to martial law, the very oppression that many people from around the world came to New York to escape.

“When the overwhelming majority of New Yorkers who are stopped andfrisked are people of color, it’s hard to avoid calling stop and friskwhat it really is — racial profiling. Being stopped and frisked isnot a minor inconvenience; it is deeply humiliating and absolutely offensive when based on skin color. There’s simply no place for racial profiling, by the police or anyone. It’s not what New York City is about.

“While it is true that stop-and-frisk has gotten some guns and criminals off the streets, it’s also true that stop-and-frisk continues to deepen the chasm between communities and police, a relationship that is vital to maintaining a safe and secure city forall New Yorkers. Stop and frisk should be abolished.

“I certainly support the Public Advocate’s call for an internalexamination of NYPD’s stop and frisk practices.”

And Mr. Norvell's here:

“That’s a defensive, knee-jerk response from Bloomberg’s City Hall that has lost sight of the community trust needed to ensure public safety.

“Bill de Blasio’s plan will help protect police officers who enter dangerous circumstances and desperately need residents to trust them and work with them, rather than staying silent due to a growing divide of distrust.

“As usual on issues like this, the Mayor’s people have chosen to repeat a big lie instead of confronting the facts. The truth is that using CompStat to create accountability for reducing unwarranted use of stop and frisk will make our neighborhoods safer.”