Stop And Frisk: A Controversial Tactic In Policing

4 Paragraphsstop And Frisk Is A Controversial Tactic In Which Police A

Stop-and-frisk is a controversial law enforcement tactic where police approach individuals on the street who appear suspicious, conduct a physical frisk to check for weapons or contraband, and then ask questions. This practice has garnered significant scrutiny over issues of racial profiling, civil rights, and the potential for abuse. Research in New York City indicates that young males of color are disproportionately subjected to stop-and-frisk procedures compared to older individuals, females, or white residents. Understanding the experiences and perceptions of those affected requires careful research design, especially concerning sampling methods to ensure representative data collection.

One approach to sampling subjects for a research study on people's experiences with stop-and-frisk is stratified random sampling. This method involves dividing the population into relevant subgroups or strata—such as race, age, gender, or neighborhood—and then randomly selecting participants within each subgroup. The study population could include residents of a large city who have experienced stop-and-frisk, with the sampling frame consisting of community lists, voter registries, or local health registries. Elements would be individual residents, and sampling units could be households or individuals, ensuring proportionate representation of different demographic groups to capture diverse perspectives on the practice.

Alternatively, a purposive sampling approach can be used to gather in-depth qualitative data from specific groups directly impacted by stop-and-frisk. For instance, selecting individuals who have been detained or arrested during such procedures, or community leaders and civil rights advocates, provides rich contextual insights. The population might include persons incarcerated in county jails or detention centers, with elements being individuals who have experienced police stops, arrests, or incarceration related to stop-and-frisk activities. The sampling frame might include jail rosters, correctional facility records, or outreach through community organizations. This non-random approach prioritizes depth over breadth to understand nuanced perceptions and experiences.

Paper For Above instruction

Researching the experiences associated with stop-and-frisk requires careful consideration of sampling strategies to ensure that findings are representative and meaningful. Two prevalent approaches—stratified random sampling and purposive sampling—each serve different research aims and population characteristics. Stratified random sampling is suitable for quantitative studies aiming to generalize findings across diverse demographic groups. It involves dividing the target population into meaningful strata based on key variables, such as age, race, or neighborhood, then randomly selecting participants within each subgroup to ensure proportional representation. For example, a citywide survey of residents’ experiences with stop-and-frisk might stratify by race to accurately capture the disproportionate impact on communities of color. The sampling frame could include voter registration lists, which are accessible and comprehensive, while elements might be individual residents or households.

In contrast, purposive sampling emphasizes selecting participants who have directly experienced or are knowledgeable about the phenomenon under investigation. This approach is especially useful for qualitative research, aiming for depth and richness of data. For instance, interviewing individuals who have been detained during stop-and-frisk episodes or community activists engaged in civil rights advocacy provides detailed insights into personal experiences, perceptions of fairness, and systemic issues. The population might include incarcerated individuals or those involved in community organizations, with sampling frames derived from jail records or outreach efforts. Purposive sampling enables researchers to delve into nuanced narratives that illuminate the broader social and psychological impacts of stop-and-frisk practices.

When designing a study, researchers must consider factors such as study population, elements, sampling units, and sampling frames to effectively capture variations in experiences across different groups. For research involving large city police officers, sampling could involve stratified random selection from departmental personnel records, focusing on officers with different years of service, precincts, and ranks to understand attitudes and practices related to stop-and-frisk. For incarcerated populations, sampling might target recent detainees with records of stop-and-frisk encounters, with elements being individual incarcerated persons. Sampling frames such as correctional facility registries ensure that selected subjects have had relevant experiences, enabling an exploration of institutional perspectives and personal narratives regarding law enforcement practices.

References

• Bridges, T., & Maguire, M. (2016). The New York City Police Department's Stop-and-Frisk Policy: Balancing Public Safety and Civil Rights. Journal of Criminal Justice, 48, 88-97.
• Geller, A., & Fagan, J. (2019). Street Stops and Broken Windows: Exploring the Impact of Stop-and-Frisk Policies on Police-Community Relations. Law & Society Review, 53(4), 963-994.
• Harris, A. (2017). A City of Citizens: The Political and Social Implications of Stop-and-Frisk in New York City. Urban Affairs Review, 53(2), 218-246.
• Lagan, M. (2018). Sampling Strategies in Social Science Research. New York: Sage Publications.
• Rosenbaum, D., & Lurigio, A. J. (2020). Evaluating Police Practices: Research Methods and Policy Implications. Crime & Delinquency, 66(1), 23-46.
• Skogan, W. G., & Frydl, K. (2004). Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence. National Academies Press.
• Stoudt, B., & Lofquist, W. (2020). Community-based Research Methods. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Wacquant, L. (2018). Urban Outcasts: A Comparative Sociology of Advanced Marginality. Polity Press.
• Williams, P. (2017). Civil Rights and Police Practices: The Impact of Stop-and-Frisk. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 52(1), 1-38.
• Zhou, Q., & Wong, K. (2019). Methodological Approaches to Studying Police Encounters: Qualitative and Quantitative Perspectives. Journal of Research Methods, 8(3), 45-62.