A new crime prevention policy is being used in NYC and causing some controversy

Exploring the Stop and Frisk Law
The stop and frisk law is one of the most controversial police procedures in the modern crime prevention world today. This law was created to try to reduce crime on the streets and try to catch people with concealed weapons before they are used. What I am going to explore is whether or not this procedure violates the 4th amendment of unreasonable search and seizures as well as examine statistics to prove this procedure effective or not.

How the law is enforced
The way this law is enforced is that policemen or women will patrol an area of his or her choice, usually by car, and look out for anything that he or she believes to be suspicious. According to huffingtonpost.com, the officers can even stop and frisk someone inside a building if they have permission from the landlord. When he or she does find something suspicious they will stop that person and proceed to do a brief pat down of the outer garments. If nothing is found then that person will be released. If a weapon or any other illegal substance is found, that person will be arrested and brought into police custody for questioning. The main complaint that people have is that this search goes against their constitutional rights because they are being searched without a warrant. It is also a hassle and an inconvenience to have policemen stopping you to pat you down. According to HP, in a 2009 report by the New York Civil Liberties Union, 93 out of 100 residents in Brownsville, Brooklyn were stopped by the NYPD for a stop and frisk procedure. Another statistic also shows that force is used more often in stops with Latinos and blacks than there is with whites, which goes along with people accusing cops of being more aggressive with certain races.

Violation of the 4th Amendment?
According to Findlaw, The fourth amendment is defined as the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Basically, it protects citizens from police officers or any other member of law enforcement trying to search or take anything from you without a warrant or reasonable suspicion. The reasonable suspicion part is where there is a very thin line that causes a lot of dispute. Statistics show that blacks and Latinos have been stopped way more than whites. This instigates an argument of racism. In my interview with Mr. Bittinger, he explains why despite all of the complaints of policemen needing probable cause to search someone, this policy, in fact, does not violate the fourth amendment. Even though the policy is constituional, the stops sometimes are not. There are very strict rules that NYPD have not been following that make the stops unconstitutional. According to HP, 30% of all stops are unconstitutional.

Pros and cons to the stop and frisk law
The argument goes both ways in this case. Most people say that this is a good idea and will be successful in reducing crime, but many people complain about being stopped for no reason and waste time being searched. In my mind and in the law enforcer’s minds, it is worth stopping and searching innocent people some of the time in order to catch the real criminals before crimes are committed. I asked another expert the same two questions that I asked Mr. Bittinger and got more interesting input. I asked: Does this policy violate the 4th amendment and is there data proving this effective.

listen to ‘Mr. Wellford interview’ on Audioboo

How is it working so far? 
Studies show that the stop and frisk policy is an effective crime deterrence and has reduced crime in many cities. The bottom line is that this is a great way to prevent crime before it happens, but what I am researching and we have to make sure of is that citizens rights are not being violated. The stop and frisk policy has not really been as effective as people thought it may be. According to HP, since 2003, stops have increased by over 524,000 and there have only been an additional 176 guns found. I thought this policy started to sound pointless so I asked Mr. B if he thought this was an effective deterrence to crime and if he thought it would continue to be used. Here is what he had to say:

Will we continue to use this crime prevention tactic?
With the minimal effectiveness of this crime prevention policy, many think that this will not last much longer and the stop and frisk policy will be put to an end in the coming years. One reason is that the NYPD has faced way to many lawsuits involving this policy and it is not worth it. Another thing is the most people stopped are innocent. According to HP, in 2011, 9 out of 10 stopped were neither arrested nor given summonses. You can find more statistics and useful information on this topic on this website.

After all, the policy that started a lot of controversy ends up not working out
After doing all of my research and talking to a couple of experts about this topic, my belief is that the toll this is taking on the citizens and police force of NYC both physically and mentally is not worth the minimal amount of crime prevention that the stop and frisk policy is doing. Here is one last opinion from a non-expert on the Stop and Frisk Policy.

listen to ‘Final project audioboo’ on Audioboo

final project audioboo

listen to ‘Final project audioboo’ on Audioboo

Exploring the Stop and Frisk Law

A Controversial Procedure in NYC May Be an Effective Way to Prevent Crime

The stop and frisk law is one of the most controversial police procedures. This law was created to try to reduce crime on the streets and try to catch people with concealed weapons before they are used. What I am going to explore is whether or not this procedure violates the 4th amendment of unreasonable search and seizures. I will also examine statistics to prove this procedure effective or not.

How the law is enforced

The way this law is enforced is that a policemen will patrol an area of his or her choice, usually by car, and look out for anything that he or she believes to be suspicious and when he or she does find something suspicious they will stop that person and proceed to do a brief pat down of the outer garments. If nothing is found then that person will be released, but if a weapon or any other illegal substance is found, that person will be arrested and brought into police custody for questioning. The main complaint that people have is that this search goes against their constitutional rights because they are being searched without a warrant. It is also a hassle and an inconvenience to have policemen stopping you to pat you down.

Pros and cons to the stop and frisk law

The argument goes both ways in this case. Most people say that this is a good idea and will be successful in reducing crime, but many people complain about being stopped for no reason and waste time being searched. In my mind and in the law enforcer’s minds, it is worth stopping and searching innocent people some of the time in order to catch the real criminals before crimes are committed.

How is it working so far?

Studies show that the stop and frisk policy is an effective crime deterrence and has reduced crime in many cities. The bottom line is that this is a great way to prevent crime before it happens, but what I am researching and we have to make sure of is that citizens rights are not being violated.

Why I chose the topic I did

iPad interview

listen to ‘iPad interview’ on Audioboo

Technology and class interview

listen to ‘Technology and class interview’ on Audioboo

Syrian Cease-Fire Controversy

Syria Agrees to a short-term cease-fire

President Assad and organizer of cease-fire, Brahimi

I chose to read about a story where Syria agreed to have a 4-day cease-fire over a religious Muslim holiday called Eid al-Adha. During this cease-fire, the Syrian government still made it known that they still had the right to respond to rebel attacks and bombings during the holiday. The reason this cease-fire was planned by Lakhdar Brahimi, an International envoy representing the Arab League and the U.N., was to try to stop violence that has been going on in Syria for 19 months. He was hoping that maybe this short term cease fire would lead to a longer cease fire and maybe the Syrian government and the rebels would negotiate and end this terrible violence that has been killing many people in the area for over a year and a half. The reaction of the rebels against Syria was diverse. Some were a little worried that maybe the Syrian government would not keep their promise and would still attack, while others flat out refused agreement to a cease fire. As part of the agreement, rebel fighters said they would commit to the truce if opposition prisoners were released on Friday. The cease-fire was supposed to take effect starting the morning of Friday, October 26^th 2012 and end on Monday, October 29^th.

CNN:http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/25/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html

Will the rebels trust the government? Will the truce last?

Car bombing in Syria on the first day of Eid al-Adha

The answer to both of those questions is an emphatic, no. It took no longer than a few hours for the truce to be broken. Evidently, there was a car bombing in the capital, Damascus, on Friday, so the truce has already been broken. There has been a lot of accusing going on between the two sides where each side is saying that they were responding to an attack from the other side. State television that was being broadcasted on Friday was saying that they were terrorist car bombings that killed 5 people and wounded 32 others. While this car bombing was going on, apparently there was also clashing going on between rebels and government troops in the rebel run neighborhoods in Aleppo. According to activists, the violence was much less intense in these clashes than they were before the truce, so maybe it has some effect on the intensity. This isn’t what Lakhdar Brahimi was aiming for though. He wanted a complete cease-fire and negotiation. It doesn’t look promising right now, but maybe over the next few days the violence settles and the Syrian government and rebels can come to a temporary agreement at least.

FOX: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/10/26/car-bomb-explodes-in-syrian-capital-despite-truce/?test=latestnews

Aljazeera: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/10/2012102615101701470.html 

Do the two stories match up?

I covered this story to compare two different news agencies covering the same exact story and try to tell what their views are based on the way they report on this story. The first website I accessed was Fox News.com. The title of their article was, “Car bomb explodes in Syrian capital despite truce.” My initial reaction on the way they covered this story was that they were extremely biased by supporting the US and criticizing the Syrian government on not being able to maintain the peace, but once I read it over a couple more times I noticed that most of the story matched up with the other website that I referred to to research this story. Most of what the fox news cite was saying was from second hand sources and didn’t seem to be very reliable. Most of the quotes and reporting was coming from The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and other activist groups. This activist group is clearly opposed to the Syrian government and could be exaggerating some of these stories to make it look like the Syrian army is instigating these attacks and bombings when really it could be all the rebels. Overall, the Fox News article seems more like an overview and basic report on a current event, rather than a breaking news story or article with direct quotes from witnesses or victims.

The next website I accessed was Aljazeera.com. This is a Qatar based website that reports on stories from around the world and has had a reputation of having some biased articles. Although Aljazeera also seems to have a lot of reports from activist groups, it does have specific direct quotes from protestors as well.

One Event, Two Stories

This investigation of two different websites reporting on the same event really shows us how stories can be skewed and how sources really do matter. In the end both articles are available to everybody and it is up to you to chose which one is more reliable, based on the sources and author.

Digital Divide or Participation Gap?

After reading both “Digital Divide or Participation Gap? Will Mobile Affect It?” and “Privacy and Data Management on Mobile devices” I believe that in todays world there is a digital divide. The use of mobile devices and laptops is very evident in our world, especially here at the University of Maryland. The way things work in lectures these days; lectures are structured so that students usually just watch a teacher give a presentation on a topic with a digital display like a PowerPoint for example. While the teacher is giving the presentation, students are taking notes on what is on each slide and what the teacher is saying. Taking notes is most easily done with a mobile device like a laptop or iPad. This is why you will see mostly every student with some sort of mobile device out during a lecture. There is, however, some students who do not have a mobile device like this and are immediately at an academic disadvantage. They could not have a device for many different reasons, but either way this is part of the whole digital divide topic. Technology is very expensive and can be difficult to afford for some people so that could be what makes the statistics in Kevin R. Guidry’s article the way they are.

According to the 2007 Educause Core Data Service survey, 65.1% of students from 994 institutions that participated in the survey use their own computer. This leaves out approximately 35% of people who do not use their own computer. Even though a majority of the students use their own computer, that 35% that don’t are missing out on one of the most important pieces of our technology-based culture that we have today. Like I said, most people would have their own computer if they could but some people cant afford it or aren’t aloud to have their own mobile devices. One place where this digital divide is really making an impact is in the classroom. Teachers and professors these days are expecting that everyone has Internet access and access to a personal computer. This can create controversy on assignments.
Sometimes teachers assign something that requires students to do research on a subject or something that requires a computer and printer and I have seen cases where a student was honestly unable to do the assignment because they could not afford their computer and didn’t have time to access a public computer because of the one day period to complete the assignment. I believe that teachers and professors must be aware of this digital divide and keep assignments basic and reasonable so that they are able to be done by students who are in the 35% group of this digital divide who don’t have their own computers. Compared to what I read about in the Privacy and Data Management article, what Kevin says is very similar, but for the people who don’t have computers or mobile devices is completely irrelevant. They don’t have to worry about privacy over the Internet or anything like that if they don’t even use it, but they are still at a disadvantage.

Facebook friends and employment

When someone looks at my Facebook, I am sure they are surprised at the amount of friends I have. I currently have around 1500 friends. I had no idea I had that many until I had to look it up for this blog post.  Before checking, I would have guessed that I had around 700 friends, which is less than half of what I actually have. This shows how I accept and send friend requests with very little consideration to whom I am accepting from and sending them to. I would say that I only keep in touch with approximately fifty people out of my 1500 friends. When I say keep in touch, I am using this term lightly. The fifty that I keep in touch with, I text or Facebook chat with at least once a month. If I am only talking to fifty out of 1500 friends it makes me realize that maybe there is no point to have that many. However, I think it important to have a Facebook and accept new friend requests now that I am attending a new school. It is easier to contact some of my classmates over Facebook. There is also a connectivity aspect to it. I may not be keeping in touch with some of my Facebook friends now, but maybe later in life I will be.

            With social media booming these days, a majority of the population has a Facebook, Twitter, or blogger account. Many people have these accounts and have personal information or photos that prevent them from being hired. I have heard that people delete their Facebook accounts before they apply for jobs in fear of their employers seeing something they do not particularly look for in employees. Examples of things that people are deleting from their accounts to avoid this include: parties, evidence of underage drinking, drugs, nudity, or any other actions that could be detrimental or misinterpreted.

            If I were to look at one my friends Facebook pages, I would most likely choose not to hire them as one of my employees. Their pages include many pictures of illegal alcohol consumption as well as use of illicit drugs. The reason I would not hire them is that these photos might give off the impression that they are irresponsible, unprofessional, or reckless. I would recommend that they immediately remove these types of pictures if they wanted to apply for any type of job. When they are posting photos or vulgar statuses, they should think about who can see their accounts before they post it. Looking at my account now I should probably think about going through all of my posts, statuses, and photos to see if there is anything that would prevent me from getting hired.

            In conclusion, social media impacts the way people interact as well as displays information to people you may not want looking at your page. Also, many people don’t realize that the amount of friends on Facebook or Twitter is unnecessary and it should only include people that you are keeping in touch with in real life. There are many pros and cons to the use of social media but people need to learn how to balance it.