1. The good news is that it works.
2. The bad news is that it doesn't stand up to any constitutional scrutiny as a legitimate form of police activity.
3. The worse news is that the policy works best when certain "people of color" are targeted, which makes the constitutional problem in Item #2 orders of magnitudes worse. You could search 100,000 random Asians on the streets and subways of NYC, for example, and you wouldn't find a single firearm on any of them.
4. For NYC residents, the best news is that with a black mayor, the New York City police will be able to get away with just about anything he wants to implement as a crime-prevention policy.
“NYC has had an effective solution in place before. It’s called the “Stop & Frisk” campaign the police implemented in the past, involving random searches of people in public places for concealed weapons.”
Hey AC, you’re correct on the conclusion Eric Adams will have great latitude on policing but we’ll see what he does with it. It’s an open question.
As to “Stop & Frisk” those details were highly effective. I know people who were connected to it and they can tell if someone is carrying a gun even in winter with heavy clothing just by watching them walk.
Unfortunately, the program is unconstitutional but Commie Wilhelm pulled the plug on it entirely even without the stop and frisk part.
That’s when NYC crime numbers began their spiral climbing to the stratosphere.
If Eric Adams is serious, he will put these details back out on the streets. It’s not illegal for a detective to go over and talk to someone.