Do Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices Deter Crime?

• Author: Alese Wooditch,David Weisburd,Sue‐Ming Yang,Sarit Weisburd
• Date: 01 February 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12172
• Published date: 01 February 2016

RESEARCH ARTICLE

STOP, QUESTION, AND FRISK

PRACTICES

Do Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices Deter

Crime?

Evidence at Microunits of Space and Time

David Weisburd

George Mason University, Hebrew University

Alese Wooditch

George Mason University

Sarit Weisburd

Tel Avi v Uni vers ity

Sue-Ming Yang

George Mason University

Research Summary

Existing studies examining the crime impacts of stop, question, and frisks (SQFs) have

focused on large geographic areas. Weisburd, Telep, and Lawton (2014) suggested that

SQFs in New York City (NYC) were highly concentrated at crime hot spots, implying

that a microlevel unit of analysis may be more appropriate. The current study aims to

address the limitations of prior studies by exploring the impact of SQFs on daily and

weekly crime incidents in NYC at a microgeographic level. The findings suggest that

SQFs produce a significant yet modest deterrent effect on crime.

Policy Implications

These findings support those who argue that SQFs deter crime. Nonetheless, it is not

clear whether other policing strategies may have similar or even stronger crime-control

This article was supported by a grant from the Open Society Foundations to John Jay College. We very much

appreciate the support of the Foundation and its program officer, Terrence Pitts, but we note that the

opinions or perspectives presented herein are our own. We want to give special thanks to Richard Rosenfeld

for his insightful comments on the work as it progressed, as well as to Preeti Chauhan for her support and

comments. Direct correspondence to David Weisburd, Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George

Mason University, 4400 University Drive, MS 6D12, Fairfax, VA 22030 (e-mail: dweisbur@gmu.edu).

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12172 C2015 American Society of Criminology 31

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 15 rIssue 1

Research Article Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices

outcomes. In turn, the level of SQFs needed to produce meaningful crime reductions

are costly in terms of police time and are potentially harmful to police legitimacy.

Stop, question, and frisks (SQFs) have long been used by the police as a method

of crime control. SQFs are also known as Terry stops because the 1968 Supreme

Court decision in Terry v. Ohio (1968) gave officers the right to stop and detain a

person when there was reasonable suspicion that he or she was in the act of committing a

crime or about to commit a crime (see Jones-Brown, Gill, and Trone, 2010). In New York

City (NYC), the use of SQFs has received particular attention both from its proponents

and detractors (Harcourt and Ludwig, 2006; Kelling and Sousa, 2001; McArdle and Erzen,

2001). One reason for this is that the number of SQFs increased dramatically in the first

decade of this century (Weisburd, Telep, and Lawton, 2014). In all, 160,851 SQFs were

recorded in NYC in 2003, but the number of SQFs reached more than 685,000 in 2011.

Successful court challenges to the strategy and changes in NYC politics during the past

few years have brought a reversal in the use of the tactic by the New York City Police

Department (NYPD). Only approximately 190,000 SQFs were recorded in 2013—a 72%

decline from its peak in 2011—and just 47,000 in 2014. Nonetheless, the returning police

chief in NYC, William Bratton, recently argued, “You cannot police without [SQFs]. If you

did not have it, you’d have anarchy” (Bratton, 2014). Although SQFs are being curtailed,

they are still considered an important part of crime-prevention activities of the NYPD.

The potential unintended negative consequences of SQFs are widely recognized and

have become extremely controversial,leading some scholars to argue that the practice is likely

doing more harm than good (see Fagan, Geller,Davies, and West, 2010). The approach has

been criticized for targeting the young, minorities, and specific neighborhoods of NYC (see

Gelman, Fagan, and Kiss, 2007; Ridgeway, 2007; Stoud, Fine, and Fox, 2011). Opponents

have argued that the pervasiveness of SQFs in NYC in the 2000s could not be justified on

constitutional grounds and that the abuse of the policy by the NYPD should be considered a

crime (Charney,Gonzalez, Kennedy, and Leader, 2010). In Floyd v. City of New York (2013),

the U.S. Federal Court of the Eastern District of New York ruled that SQFs as carried out

in NYC were unconstitutional and appointed a special monitor to institute substantive

reforms (see Center for Constitutional Rights, 2015; Goldstein, 2013). Notwithstanding

this court ruling and criticism of the policy more generally, the police and proponents

(whether advocating a maximalist or a minimalist approach) argue that SQFs provide an

effective method for reducing crime (Meares, 2014). Indeed, with a recent rise in shootings

and homicides in NYC in 2015, the media has considered the decline in SQFs as a key

culprit (e.g., Destefano, 2015). Accordingly, a key question in the debate about SQFs is

whether the tactic deters crime.

Weisburd et al. (2014) suggested that SQFs are likely to reduce crime because they

are concentrated at microgeographic crime hot spots. They found that crime was very

32 Criminology & Public Policy