Introduction
There have been multiple incidences of institutional racism and police use of excessive force on the people of color in the US. The matter has been termed as a lack of proper measures to define searches and frisks. In most cases, the affected are African-American and Hispanic individuals. More often, it is mandatory that citizens comply with the demands of police officers and whether they want to stop and frisk or search you, considerably, most police searches or frisks may end up to an arrest. Disproportionate use of force has been the trend in the practice of policing in the US. There have been rising incidents that show that unreasonable searches and frisks contribute significantly to the number of cruel deaths caused by the excessive use of force and absurd firing on the offenders. The society needs to emphasize on the aspect of a shared vision to maintain law and order. The police officer's intentions are geared towards arresting a suspect and not to minimize the chances of a criminal offense from happening. There are theories that define the aspect. They include Marxist and realism theory. The findings show that the government is questionable concerning how it handles people of color at an institutional level. It is a point to note that police brutality gets connected to racial profiling, religion, socioeconomic status, and politics.
Police Use of Force and De-escalation Policies on Stop and Frisk
Lately, there have been incidences of police brutality with the recent one in Atlanta causing one of the key figures; the police chief of Atlanta resigning die to the escalating pressures resulting from improper actions and excess use of force by the police. The matter has been termed as a lack of proper measures to define searches and frisks on a racial and institutional basis. Police oppress most of the time, African-American and Hispanic nationals, while the law of frisking and searching potential suspects is enacted. The cops stop most victims of such incidents then interrogated on what they carry in their bags, pockets, or waists. Considerably, the need for identifying what the difference between the terms frisking and searching is is essential to comprehend whether police brutality showcased is legally accepted by the constitution (Miller et al., 2017). More often, it is mandatory that citizens comply with the demands of police officers and whether they want to stop and frisk or search you, considerably, most polite searches or frisks may end up to an arrest (Ridgeway, 2007). The concepts of search and frisk have created a paradox that can only be understood through identifying their effectiveness in the enforcement of the law as well as a violation of the interests of personal civil autonomies.
Problem Statement
Disproportionate use of force has been the trend in the practice of policing in the US. As much as the United States is enjoying community policing greatly, there have been rising incidents that show that unreasonable searches and frisks contribute significantly to the number of cruel deaths caused by the excessive use of force and absurd firing on the offenders. The case of George Floyd, who was assaulted to a close of 9 minutes until his death by Dereck Chauvin in Minneapolis, spark protests that are still ongoing across different states in the US and UK. The number of police brutality cases have been in the record, but the recent incidents have made society to stand up and call for police reforms. In 2015, there was a brutal arrest of a retired tennis player in Manhattan by an officer named James Frascatore. The act was accepted negatively by people. On 20th July 2017, the policeman got charged with brutality and indiscipline. Similarly, a brutality incident happened in July 2017 when an American police officer shot dead an Australian woman named Damond from Sydney after she had made an emergency call informing the police of sexual assault in her neighborhood. Many questions come up on brutal issues that are very open that the police misuse their capacity and position to own firearms (Miller et al., 2017).
Differentiating a Police Frisk from a Police Search Some of a police officer's procedures in light of suspecting a person to be carrying a weapon or illicit drugs are to both stop the individual through polite request and go ahead with frisking them or searching in their belongings such as bags or pockets to determine whether their suspicion was right or wrong. This action is only limited to enable the police officer to prevent the occurrence of a criminal offense from happening. The difference between a frisk and a search is that a police officer conducting a frisk is only allowed to pat down the outer clothing of a suspect (Rios et al., 2020). However, while frisking, when the officer gets hold of an object that may seem like a weapon, he is first needed to inquire what it is from the suspect before reaching out to it to reveal its identity. In most cases, a frisk involves intruding into the personal clothing or possessions of a suspect. This can include checking inside the suspect's pockets, shoes, or cap, their bags, and vehicles, if any, is present as the scene (Rios et al., 2020). The stop is then ceased once nothing has been found, and the suspect has been cleared for not possessing any weapons or drugs. Contrariwise, should there be a weapon concealed by the suspect, an arrest can then be made whereby the suspect is carried to the police department and booked for investigations and apprehension.
Effectiveness of Search and Frisk in the Enforcement of LawThe search and frisk authority have been offered to police officers through a rational scheme that upholds police activity. However, significant debates have emanated from the concern of whether concealed weapons found on a suspect during a frisk and search could be used as evidence in court. Ponte Carvalho and Duarte (2018) argue that, even though possession of illegal weapons is a criminal offense according to the public laws in the US, the fact remains that the firearm was not used to commit any crime at the time of the search or frisk. The police must ensure that law and order are maintained within the society; extracting a weapon from a suspect is a suitable way of preventing a criminal offense awaiting to occur. It is believed that most stops made by police officers need to begin with a frisk.
A search is only ethical if there is a reasonable doubt that the suspected being frisked is hiding a weapon. This can be achieved through the officer feeling a hard object hidden underneath the clothing of the suspect; thereafter, the officer is expected to conduct a thorough search on the suspect to unveil the weapon being concealed (Ponte Carvalho & Duarte, 2018). Justifying the essence of a frisk or search could put the police officer's life in danger. Actions such as searching and frisking suspects may be the easiest way of disarming criminals to secure the lives of the police officers and those around the suspect. In public places such as malls and clubs, everyone who visits the scenery must be frisked or searched to prevent any harm from coming to the people around that area.
There are limitations relating to the contexts of a protective search or frisk by a police officer. Based on the police officer's suspicion on the illegal possession of their suspect, certain areas are not granted access to frisking, such as the private parts of the suspect. Most officers are reported to have sexually assaulted a suspect as a result of frisking or searching their private part in the pursuit of justifying their suspicion of concealed weapons or drugs. Besides, such limitations and procedures are aimed at protecting officers from injuring themselves by hidden weapons. As earlier stated, police officers are required to ask their suspects to raise their hands or place them in areas that are visible to them. This action is aimed at protecting them in case a suspect reaches out for a weapon to harm an officer with the hope of getting away with the act of possession of illegal weaponry.
Violation of the Interests of Personal Civil AutonomiesNot more than one count has it been reported by potential suspects stopped by police officers practiced their legal duty through violating the suspect's constitutional rights who should be found not guilty until proven guilty. Rios et al. (2020) argue that when police make a stop to either frisk or search a suspect, it is usually aimed at legalizing the arrest. That is, psychologically, the police officer's intentions are geared towards arresting a suspect and not to minimize the chances of a criminal offense from happening. It is having further been supported by Cooley et al. (2019), who assert that this perception is what at most times origins of police brutality towards an innocent suspect. Miner et al. (2016) disagree by claiming that the sole cause of police brutality during searches and frisks usually is the unwillingness of a suspect to comply. This could be shown through a suspect drawing out his/her weapon when confronted by the police, resistance to comply with the requests of a police officer like when instructed to place their hand behind their heads, among others.
It is quite often that most suspects, when found in possession of illegal substances like weapons or drugs, will deny claims of those items being in their custody at the time of the search. Besides, it is also unfortunate that police officers attempt implicating innocent people as criminals due to being bribery or rather abusing their power to oppress the person of interest (Miner et al., 2016). Most of the foundations of police officers misusing their constitutional power might be driven by racial discrimination, conflict of sexual personality, along with xenophobic habits. Unfortunately, the ailment to this problem cannot be from the distortion of the principles in the Fourth Amendment since it risks the rice of police injuries and fatalities nonetheless (Ridgeway, 2007). Instead, should the realization of a police officer engaging in unlawful exploitation of powers given to him/her, the absolute remedy can be found in the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
There should be a call for the courts to investigate the false testimony made by the police carefully and taking measures such as weeding them out and establishing internal police practices and procedures to effectuate the goal of minimizing the misuse of administrative power towards the oppression of common citizens (Cooley et al., 2019). The improper stop and frisks have made the police force actions to be questionable. Does the training of police officers lay more focus on risks rather than assisting the public? And does the government show an effort to intervene in cases of police brutality despite the spiking protests across the United States as well as in Great Britain?
Theoretical Approach to Police Brutality
The Marxist political theory revolves around the philosophy of class struggle and political constraints. Politics seem to safeguard weird police acts against the minority groups to maintain their power against the socially stratified society. Most states seem to show impulsive behavior to the economic and social savages by the police (Alves & Costa Vargas, 2017).
Application of Marxist Political Theory
Police officers tend to discourage social equality. It was found that socially neutral police face a hard time in the police department, portraying that Marxist political theory is a correct supposition to the rampant police injustices (Plohetski, 2016). The police's actions towards the naked and unarmed David Joseph shows that there is the...
