By: Maria Campos
In New York, the implementation of stop and frisk has been plagued by controversy, with some saying that it reduces crime while others condemning it for its use of racial profiling. While it is obvious that stop and frisk targets black and latino youth, there is a continued effort to spread its use to other cities, such as Oakland and San Francisco. In the recent ABC news article , former NYC police commissioner, Bill Bratton claims that the use of stop-and-frisk is an effective way to decrease crime. He has recently been appointed as a consultant to the city of Oakland and is confident that the use of this policy will bring change to Oakland’s crime rates. The stop and frisk policy has already spread to Los Angeles and Boston and he believes that Oakland could also benefit from this tactic.
As the use of terry stops expands, the president of the NAACP , Benjamin Jealous, has recently denounced the use of them stating that “Its thesis is this when you boil it down...that color and age are reasonable grounds for suspicion." The NAACP and critics of the terry stops point out that, not only is it targeting people of color, but also most of the stops are ineffective. As learned in lecture,the Oakland police force is already highly understaffed, implementing stop and frisk could contribute to the already difficult task of answering to emergency calls. Valuable resources that could be put to better use are being wasted on searching young teenagers who happen to cross paths with a cop.
Terry stops also connect to the idea of the Panopticon. In the panopticon, individuals learned to police themselves because they never knew who might be watching them from behind the window. In Overseers of the Poor, Gilliom states that “ as Foucault put it, they ‘internalize the gaze’ so that the operation of power becomes cheaper, easier, and more effective” (Gilliom,130). As seen in the video we watched during lecture, knowing that an individual will most likely be stopped and frisked because they are a young male of color changes the amount of time they spend outside with friends and also makes them wary of police officers. Overtime, the change in behavior would be internalized. This same idea of internalizing the gaze creates a division between the police and the community. The police is no longer seen as a legitimate force of protection but rather as invaders on the community. The use of terry stops and the targeting of specific communities creates hostility between the community and the police, making it more difficult to effectively police an area because of lack of cooperation from the very people who the police are meant to be protecting.
Insightful. So, are Gilliom and Monahan correct when they play down the significance of the panopticon for understanding surveillance?
ReplyDeleteIt is a very interesting connection you made between stop and frisk practice and the idea of panopticon. In response to a comment that was made earlier, I think that Gilliom and Monahan stressed the idea of surveillant assemblage because in modern society we are subject to surveillance from numerous entities and not one, as in case of the Panopticon. I believe, however, that they did undermine the significance of panopticon a little. I think that some of those individual entities that constitute the assemblage of a “general” surveillance are functioning as panopticons. For example, surveillance cameras on traffic lights, or in a workplace, have similar effects on one’s behavior as panopticon: they alter our behavior. Mariola Bak
ReplyDeleteThe connection between stop and frisk and the "internal gaze" is one issues that is definitely worth being discussed. I don't think anybody can argue about the success of the program but hardly avoid the costs. In NYC the NYPD is the most prevalent panopticon solely because their presence cause the largest "internal gaze." In my opinion, this does cause major concern for the program. The largest one, is the ability for the program to change behavior leading to a split in society. This split causes a "them vs us" mentality as portrayed in the "Overseers of the Poor". This mentality subtracts from the legitimacy of the police department and can have serious repercussions.
ReplyDeleteBut can one still consider that we are under the watch of the panopticon? I would have to believe that since our society has become more technologically complex the panopticon in theory does as well. I imagine the panopticon adding levels to the initial room with mirrors. I think the significant issues arise when more levels are added or they have the ability to easily communicate with each other. Then we really will have the "eye in the sky".
Joel Pititto