Civil rights advocates have struck again, this time with a blow against an effective crime-fighting tool.
NY LAW LIMITS NYPD STOP-FRISK DATABASE
Gov. David Paterson signed legislation, calling the practice "not a policy for a democracy"
By Marc Beja
Associated Press
July 16, 2010
NEW YORK — Gov. David Paterson signed legislation Friday that eliminates a database of thousands of people stopped and frisked by New York City police without facing charges, calling the practice "not a policy for a democracy."
Paterson signed the law over vehement objections of New York City's mayor and police commissioner, who said the city was losing a key crime-fighting tool.
But the governor said the policy that targets criminals won't be affected by eliminating a database of people who were stopped, then released.
"This law does not in any way tamper with our stop-and-frisk policies," Paterson said. "What it does is it disallows the use of personal data of innocent people who have not done anything wrong. ... That is not a policy for a democracy."
Critics have said information from such stops, mainly of blacks and Latinos who are innocent, can lead to future police suspicion and surveillance. Police say the database helped to solve crimes, including anti-gay and anti-Hispanic bias attacks.
"Albany has robbed us of a great crime-fighting tool, one that saved lives," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said in a statement. "Without it, there will be, inevitably, killers and other criminals who won't be captured as quickly, or perhaps ever."
Donna Liberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, praised Paterson for signing the legislation.
"Innocent people stopped by the police for doing nothing more than going to school, work or the subway should not become permanent criminal suspects," said Liberman. "By signing this bill, the Paterson administration has put itself on the right side of history and leaves an important legacy in support of civil rights, civil liberties and common sense."
1 comment:
Another emotional reaction to a perceived injustice.
No understanding of why or how this was being done....just ban the database.
Kind of like Arizona's immigration law. Most of the arguments address issues not contained in the law.
Post a Comment