The Rev. Al Sharpton, center, walks with demonstrators during a silent march to end 'stop-and-frisk'
Photo Credit: NBC New York

Thank God federal judges in New York yesterday stayed the ruling by that idiot Judge Shira Scheindlin and rightly removed her from the case (1).

I say 'Thank God' because now the city can go about saving more black lives thanks to the 'Stop & Frisk' program. Al Sharpton must really be pissed that there will be less black-on-black crime. Why? Simple: there will be less need for demagogues like Sharpton with less crime and havoc in black communities. Who needs Jesse Jackson, the NAACP, Sharpton, the ACLU if blacks can live peacefully, be secure walking on the streets, and become successful because of the NYPD program?

And indeed, 'Stop & Frisk' is extremely successful; in New York City in 2008 there were 540,320 stops of which 293,934 resulted in frisks and produced 32,206 arrests, 34,802 summonses, and the confiscation of 16,150 illegal knives, guns, other weapons, burglary tools, drugs and other contraband (2).

These are tens of thousands of arrests that would not have occurred otherwise. These are thousands of drugs and weapons removed from our streets that would not have been removed otherwise.

Those who habitually scream 'racist' whenever a teensy incident happens to black folk ignore the documented fact that mostly minority lives are saved, mostly minority victims are spared a mugging, that mostly minority victims are kept from being knifed, bludgeoned, or shot.

What is less known is that when police fill out contact cards as to the reason the stop was made, in addition to name and address of the stoppee, they also include other information such as tattoos, gang affiliation, and descriptive clothing, things that can help lead to arrests when some of these individuals later commit crimes.

Critics of the program point out that only 10% of those stopped are white. But as I pointed out in my article Black Profiling is a necessary and good thing: "It is not racial discrimination to single out a race or group for investigation if it is done based on crime statistics." And indeed the statistics bear that out for New York City: white suspects account for 8.7% of all murder and non-negligent manslaughter suspects (3). That means that if we, as a society, want to reduce the most violent of all crimes, then we should stop even fewer whites. Since non-whites in New York City account for almost 92% of all murders, stopping 90% non-whites seems entirely rational, reasonable, and appropriate. But to be fair, we really are stopping too many whites.

Unless of course we don't really care about reducing crime, but only in appearing politically correct. If a bank is robbed by a 24 year-old black youth, then when scouring the neighborhood for the possible perpetrators, should the police pull over an equal number of young blacks and 80 year-old white grandmothers, you know, just so the police won't be called racists? God save us from idiots like these.