Final exam outline blog (week 8)

5/19/2014

For this weeks blog I am asking you to review the final paper assignment on blackboard. Each student will post their responses to the questions below regarding the case study of your choice. Below are the case studies. Review them, choose one and answer the questions below. This activity will help you write your final paper and prepare you to make a plan.
NOTE: You may need to do additional research to learn about the issues in each case study.

Why is this a social or political problem? What two ideas did you learn from the reading that apply to your problem?
How does what you have read or discussed in class helped you understand the issue presented?
Why do you think this political problem exists?
Who benefits from this problem persisting and who wins if the problem is addressed? From your perspective explain why?

For this blog post you will be asked to respond to another persons post. This is your opportunity to support one another in developing your own personal political ideology. Your ideology will highly influence the route you take to address each issue.

Case Study #1

An ongoing campaign in a low-income, immigrant neighborhood has succeeded in uniting a coalition of residents, local businesses, youth groups and faith groups to stop developers from using the neighborhood as an illegal dumping ground. The environmental coalition, Quality for Life, is strong, but lately participation has waned and the group has spent the majority of its funds on the anti-dumping campaign. Though the dumping has stopped, the coalition would like to address a long-term concern with several industries nearby that they suspect are not complying with pollution caps and limits. The neighborhood in and around the industries has a higher than average childhood asthma rate.

Case Study #2

After a rise in robberies at gunpoint and other violent crime with weapons in a downtown area, the local Police Department has adopted a policy of “stop-and-frisk” on demand. A newspaper investigation recently found that male police officers have been stopping a high proportion of women and subjecting them to humiliating body frisks, even though the rate of guns found on men and women is very low. Civil rights leaders are now arguing that the bulk of stop-and-frisk encounters are legally unjustified.

Case Study #3

A developer has submitted plans to build a mall including a grocery store, drugstore and several retail shops. The grocery store is needed in the neighborhood, which currently has only small markets that don’t sell any fresh produce. However, developing the land in question would require building an access road that would divert traffic into a nearby residential neighborhood where many families live. It would require widening roads in the neighborhood by claiming some land in front of houses. No one has calculated how much traffic would increase, but the road near the mall is a major artery.

54 Comments

imani

5/22/2014 02:24:54 am

I am doing cause number two. The stop and frisk policy is a social and political problem because the issue is resulted in harassment of people mainly of Black and Latino heritage. Yet it is considered a political problem as well because this policy is deemed unconstitutional and has gained support of civil rights/ and political leaders. What has been discussed in class as far as mass surveillance is related to this subject as well, I feel. I say this because this is a more physical then technological and another way of invading ones personal and private space. Due to the description of to why this problem exist is because of a higher violence rate in criminal matters. Yet instead of surveying the areas or putting more cops on the street to do their job, stop and frisk allows more hours to be wasted and more allows more people the right to feel distrust in regards to the law enforcement and possibly even more lawsuits to be filed. The initiator of the policy itself benefits from this policy prevailing and continuing as well as the political leaders who endorsed this idea. Yet, if the problem is addressed, citizens would benefit due to less harassment and less tax dollars being wasted. The violent crimes that have ran rampant would be more focused on including more time and man power on finding a better solution.

Lars Velken

5/22/2014 03:58:19 am

The issue of perpetuating racism, sexism, and other authoritarian forms of hate is something synonymous with police activity. Equally, the politics as you have said are more difficult to change for the benefit of the people most highly affected. This means that abuses of power are unfortunately and often some of the most significant evidence that benefits forerunners for civil rights. While on the other hand, it is always easier to argue the negative against change. This is why it is even more difficult when fighting against the authoritarian powers using their own tools, because they have more tools to support them, and don’t have to try as hard either.

Armando Arzate

5/23/2014 02:27:01 am

Great post, it was well written and had a lot of great points. I to believe that not only would police be abusing their power even more than what they already do but that it is definitely also an invasion of privacy. I strongly believe that this would only benefit the police and not the communities. I am positive that many activist groups will try and abolish or prevent this from happening. Not only will colored organization and human right activist will fight for this but also feminist as women would be harassed constantly by male officers. This policy would be exactly like the death penalty; not necessary as it does not prevent nor reduce crime but only give the government and it’s foot soldiers more power.

Zhi(Tony) D. Li link

5/23/2014 08:56:00 am

Hello Imani Sanders. I completely agree that there is always a trade-off between personal interests and privacy issues. I think using surveillance cameras to monitor the street’s situation is better than putting more police at the street, such as question and searching. Just like how airport police did. If airport staff find someone looks suspected either though watching camera or physically, then the police official come to question you or searching you if it is necessary. I believe that we still have social or political problems with variety of police and rules have around us.

Leon Fraser

5/26/2014 02:00:00 pm

I agree with you, police manly target African American and Latino heritage because they are most of the time stereotyped to be criminals or suspects of criminal activity. Women are often targeted and sexually assaulted especially amongst male officers yet if they increase of stop and frisking activity a lot of corrupted or racist police would see that as a chance to abuse the civilians. Although not all police are like that and police officers cannot control or know what every police officer is doing, yet if they stop and frisk every suspected individual, the people who are innocent would feel as though they are criminals and there is a good chance that they can be victims of police brutality yet we live in American land of the free, theirs nothing free about feeling like a criminal and having to worry whether we would be victims of police brutality.

Lars Velken

5/22/2014 03:50:40 am

In case study number two, the police department’s new policy of stopping and frisking people illustrates a greater social problem. While there is a relative rise in violent crime, the police service has created an unwarranted precedent for suspecting all people. Taking widespread and highly generalizing precautions may provide some small statistic of elevated safety, but in total it is representative of the police looking out primarily for their own interests, even though they are technically for the public good. This is representative in the cases of civilian women being violated. The reading in chapter twelve provides the legal references for the inherent relationships between power and politics. People have proven repeatedly that when money, power, or some other self-benefiting motivation is involved, the goals of their occupational position experiences some slack. Its my opinion that the issue with violations by police on civilians is part of a system flaw in American culture, originating out of colonial and military-industrial prerogatives. Police are in a position of often-unquestioned authority, which not only allows them to take advantage of their position, but in times of overreach causes the public to question and criticize victims. This is exacerbated by hegemonic education in police and military academie. The way the question of who wins and loses by these persisting behaviors is evidence enough of the conflict in the social and political climate. Naturally, the police and militarized system of authority benefit by subduing its citizens at every opportunity, and in contrast by equalizing the power structure laterally, and educating authorities to serve its people as equals once again, the civilian population in essence, wins.

Farkhanda

5/22/2014 08:04:50 am

Hi Lars,
You made some points that i totally agree with as the police only protecting themselves and their own interests at the end of the day. Like you said when there is power involved with money, as we have seen in our political system. The police in this country seem to not get the big picture of their responsibilities as they are to protect, not control them. The police need to realize to serve the people not themselves.

dolly perez

6/8/2014 06:34:49 pm

Velken,
I totally agree with you when you begin to talk about how police officers only look out for themselves. I believe they do because the are two types of cops as we all know. This could be a very good thing to talk about on the final paper.

Farkhanda Omar

5/22/2014 07:54:55 am

The first case study I think is a prominently significant problem that I chose to address and research on. Watching documentaries and reading the news about this widespread problem has made me want to choose this case. Illegal dumping affects everyone as it harms our natural environment, our health, our economic development, the food we consume, the air we breath,etc. The impact illegal dumping caused by companies is well known throughout the country as we have commonly seen and heard the consequences especially to the people living around the dumping site as the number of people getting ill have risen and environmental conditions getting worse. I think companies pick dumping sites in cities that are vulnerable like poor or remote areas that are easy to target without getting in trouble and causing a protest. There are several reasons why this problem exists. Like we talked about in class, corporations and companies almost get away with anything they like, no matter how big or severe the damage is. They dump their mess at a place to save money and where no one is willing to stir any uprising or revolt. One example I think is lack of knowledge and abuse of power causes this problem as developers have the money to do what they want but citizens not realizing its impact till it affects them. I also think this problem takes place when there isn't strong law enforcement in the area. If the community doesn't take action for their health and safety against this serious problem than it will certainly grow, and will help only the opponent by doing what they are known for, ruining peoples lives and the environment without being blamed by their consequences .

Jennifer Hernandez

5/23/2014 08:54:22 am

I think you make pretty good points especially when saying that lack of common knowledge can also be a problem since these big companies do take money as a use to take advantage of certain areas. I did not see that point until you brought it up. It could be that they also choose certain sites as you said by the quality of the community as well as the demographics. As the case study states, the participation in the Quality for Life program is becoming bleak and the citizens should speak up if they are willing to change these problems that arise as the illegal dumping continues.

Eduardo Ruiz

5/26/2014 03:41:39 pm

I agree with you entirely. All these companies target the low-income area so that it is easier for them to get away for dumping dangerous waste, and the government, up to a certain degree, doesn’t care that it is happening. As long as someone is getting paid, government official keep this sort of thing of the records.

Cynthia Kay

5/22/2014 11:02:58 am

I can only assume in case study #2 that the issue of the high proportion of women being subject of humiliating body frisks is a hypothetical scenario as the argument tends to be minorities subject to unnecessary and unwarranted searches. For clarification, “frisk” pertains to another more common term “pat search” which applies to searching an individual outside of clothing, not into pockets. Searches of women are usually conducted by women officers when it is convenient to do so however, in urgent situations, men will use a different technique which is somewhat less invasive when pat searching a woman detainee.
Using the “stop, question, and frisk” example initiated by NYPD in 1990 in a heavily controversial effort to reduce violent crime and take guns off the street. This was a political problem of a poorly directed police tactic in response to a social problem of high crime, which in turn created more social problems of violation of civil liberties. It appears that Mayor Bloomberg and police Commissioner Kelly must have cut class on search and seizure day in school and perhaps never took the Fourth Amendment seriously. We cannot blame the police officers in general as they were acting on direction of the Administration and failure to perform these duties is nothing short of insubordination and hinders promotion ability. Many officers vehemently opposed this order and rightfully so. My research as so far reveals much false rhetoric in response to public opinion in the matter but the fact remains, without “reasonable suspicion” beyond just being in a high crime area, NYPD is setting up their officers and department for misconduct lawsuits. Certainly more searches resulted in more arrests and may have kept more weapons off the street but this created a black eye for NYPD and law enforcement in general.

Kaylie Otsuka

5/22/2014 01:38:09 pm

Cynthia,
Perfectly stated, I believe the key is "unnecessary and unwarranted." I liked the research you did regarding the 1990 NYPD "stop, question, and frisk" example, and the explanation of the results to the social experiment. Your closing statement regarding the only outcome of the frisk rule is the lawsuits and increase in violence and crime. I think you have an excellent start to a great essay. Keep up the good work!
Kaylie Otsuka

Travis Himebaugh

5/23/2014 01:13:11 pm

I stand by these statements completely. I'm sure the police found it very prudent to seize and embarrass people searching for concealed weapons in defiance of statistics. But quite frankly the Constitution guarantees us a freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, and until they can justify a search as reasonable, it should be punishable for them to perform these searches.

Furthermore, these searches are disproportionately focused on minorities, which shows where police priorities are, and some eighty percent of those searched were completely innocent. Thus it is a policy that throws out our message of innocence until proven guilt.

Michael Plaza

5/26/2014 11:42:25 am

Cynthia, thank you for the feedback on the post that I had made. You made a really good point about how the TSA, going to sporting events, and entering a courthouse require searches just as well as officers doing a pat down. Although, what can be humiliating, about a search conducted outside of admitting oneself to a higher security surrounding , is that it is in public and can be intrusive unto a person who may be entirely innocent walking down a street. I see what you mean though with what you said. You make a good point in your post about how combating the social problem of high crime led to another social problem of violation of civil liberties. What is reasonable and what is good public policy seems to be the question here.

Christopher

5/26/2014 05:58:17 pm

I agree. I also think that there are larger constitutional issues in this case, breaches of 4th and 14th amendment rights, in addition to blatant racial profiling. Even if police aren't going out of there way to be consciously racist, the policy works on inherent racial bias that is difficult to "prove," in a court of law, yet which has severe implications on communities of color.

Kaylie Otsuka

5/22/2014 01:33:10 pm

As discussed in class, the SB1010 ruling in Arizona is the promotional act of racial profiling. By defining a universal image of a person’s assumed language and cultural identification, S.B. 1010 enables people to legally check a person’s paper based on their physical appearance assuming they are an immigrant simply because they “look” like one. Similarly, to adopt a policy of “stop-and-frisk” based on racial or physical suspicion is equally as demeaning and wrong. Women in particular are targeted by male cops despite statistical evidence proving they are less likely to commit the crime the policy addresses. These “stop-and-frisk” encounters are wrong on the bases of invading a person’s personal space, rights, and property. This is also an issue because anyone is subject to a pat down without any evidence or probable cause. This lawfully, socially subjects people to be racially profiled and discriminated. Two ideas that came to mind about this case study are the inequality between men and women, and the issue of racial discrimination.
The class discussion about racial profiling and the power of the government to pass unlawful laws as they please had exploited the prejudice Americans still hold today. I believe this political and social problem exists because of the fear of foreign races and the American disapproval of others. Instead of conforming to assimilation, we all fear the unknown which causes major problems globally. I believe that both the government and the neighborhood benefit from this. Although the search is wrong and unlawful, its intention is to keep the streets safe from violence and solve the existing weaponry problem. However if the issue keeps happening, I believe the government benefits because they are the ones putting the guns on the streets, collecting revenue from the people; ultimately creating a self-driven issue for their own selfish benefit.

Armando Arzate

5/23/2014 02:14:14 am

I am doing case study #2. The “Stop and Frisk” policy is both a social and political problem. Not only will we have a rise in racial profiling cases but we will also have a rise in police harassment and abuse as women are being subjected to humiliating frisks. Police would begin to take action without obtaining any warrants or permission as it would be completely legal. As the community is subject to racial profiling, harassment, and even some sort of invasion of privacy people will become frustrated which will then result an increase in violence. The “stop and frisk” policy will create an unneeded wave of chaos as it will not prevent crime as little weapons are being found but rather increase it as people feel abused. This policy will not help anyone but the police as there would be an increase in cops however, low-income neighborhoods would definitely be affected and suffer by it. Low-income communities already have a pretty bad relationship with not only authority but specifically will the police. Police abuse their power and often target blacks and Hispanics while most other people are let off quite easy. If we take the statistics of those living in poverty we will realize that most would be minorities. As Minorities will continue to be subject to the police abuse at a higher extreme they will begin to not only not trust them but to actually hate police and that is a big problem. The community should feel safe with those who are assigned to serve and protect; who are also funded by their taxes. Police officers should be alert and cautious however, they should also appreciate all the tax payers for their jobs.

imani

5/23/2014 03:09:48 am

Definitely correct. I agree with your viewpoint of highlighting the
'classism' that is introduced into the situation that I hadn't recognized before. I agree that mainly the low income community will be targeted in this policy and will be abused. Whereas a divide will be created and visible even more if this policy is approved, between not only police and citizens, but possibly even classes.

Michael Plaza

5/23/2014 07:34:59 am

Case study number 2 is the issue that pops out to me that I will address in my final paper. I am a criminal justice major and have had lengthy class discussions in the past over the legality of stop-and-frisk procedures and the criteria that must be met by law enforcement in order to lawfully conduct such a course of action. In class I purported that mass surveillance is, in a way, criminalizing all Americans since nobody is giving formal consent to have their private messages and encounters (virtual and real) collected by an agency. Such an issue as stop-and-frisk being used on demand would be under such a category as criminalizing all Americans. I reality, a pat down, or stop-and-frisk is utilized by law enforcement in an effort to protect the officer conducting it. A police officer must have reasonable suspicion that the temporary detainee is armed with a weapon. If there is no reasonable suspicion in that context, the officer has no right to this procedure. Case two states how robberies and violent crime in recent rise has led to the decision of unlimited stop-and-frisk power, which would go against the logic of reasonable suspicion. This political problem exists because of the constant battle about what is good policy for the people and what is reasonable for the people. If this issue was addressed the people would benefit from it, primarily those subjected to humiliated body frisks that were, perhaps, frivolously searched due to the “on demand” ability vested in the police local police department mentioned in the case. If this persists, it could lead to the wider scope of multiple police organizations utilizing this on demand pat down, and could even evolve to on demand searches that could be more invasive then a stop-and-frisk Terry pat down.

Cynthia Kay

5/25/2014 01:34:18 pm

Case #2 sure seems to be the popular. I am glad you are taking an interest in the criminal justice system Michael. Yes, you are correct about the reasonable suspicion necessary beyond the mere "crime area" ploy. Fortunately, our court system in California, particularly in Contra Costa County (even given the fact that for the most part is ultra conservative) is less lenient on lack of sufficient evidence on searches. Our District Attorney's office wouldn't even file a case without more probable cause. I am not really sure what you meant by a "humiliated body frisk" though. Would it be more humiliating than when entering a court house, sporting event, or when the TSA searches me before I go on a plane?

Jennifer Hernandez

5/23/2014 08:48:27 am

In case study number one, it most certainly is a social problem in the fact that it applies to any citizen and it could also happen to anybody in any town if a problem where pollution and dumping can occur because the over consumption and production of many produce. Politically it is an issue since it would be and it is the job of the government as we previously talked about before, to have the safety of the citizens first, but it won’t always be that case if we still have problems such as these that persist. When it comes to situations where a child is at stake and has an ailment such as asthma, it comes to show that industries and consumerism that inspires more production from these harmful industries don’t really care unless the law is greatly laid down for them. If the Quality for Life in this case strives, the many benefits would be great for the people in the neighboring areas where they have a better way of life especially for kids who most likely got asthma because of the pollution. Those who benefit from the problem would be the industries who probably wouldn’t want to stress out and lay out more money for a better way to produce and not pollute. Since we have spoken before that majority of industries like to make things in a cheaper manner regardless of the negative effects, it would be of no surprise to know that this may be the reason why some still pollute. I think that in this situation the environment people live in needs to be taken more seriously since they are consumers as well in this cycle of consumerism.

Michael Plaza

5/26/2014 11:48:47 am

Jennifer, indeed number one is of great concern, especially concerning the current state of affairs with the condition our world is in. Not only safety of citizens is at stake here, it is the safety and security of the whole entire human race. You are right in that the environment in which people live should be taken more seriously in respects to the quality of life concerning peoples well being.

Zhi(Tony) D. Li link

5/23/2014 08:53:18 am

I am choosing case study #2 to be my blog post topic.
1. Why is this a social or political problem?
In the case study #2, it mentions that there is an increase in violent crime in a downtown area; then, an issue of the high percentage of women being subject of humiliating body frisks by the local male police for searching purposes was reported in a newspaper. Civil rights people, then, pointed out that the potential male police’s action is legal but not fair and necessary, and the potential action is not expected to continue into future because of that overall. There is an appoint need to be noted that why the male police’s potentially unnecessary action gave rise to a social or political problem is because of unfair, unnecessary, and unwarranted searches.

What two ideas did you learn from the reading that apply to your problem?
1) One idea is that the Police Department believes the action of question and research people on the street significantly help reducing in violent crime and moving gun off the street.
2) Another idea is that although the action with aim of helping reducing crimes, officials also need to think about what if there is a good female citizen who is not a criminal are subjecting to a body search at the street and the female’s feelings.

2. How does what you have read or discussed in class helped you understand the issue presented?
Reading and discussion should not occupy too much in-class time. And, discussion is expected to appear on-online style, such as Blackboard discussion board. For international students, in-class discussion is not that helpful and hard to hear, especially in a large classroom; besides, different people have different accents. Frankly, a similar issue that mass surveillance was related to the study case #2 was discussed in class.

3. Why do you think this political problem exists?
One reason is that the political problems start when the police are made. The political problem usually exists because it is designed for protecting and helping the majority of people’s interests rather than a tiny amount of people’s interests.
Anther reason is the police official is lacking of moral and failure in doing their professional jobs.

4. Who benefits from this problem persisting and who wins if the problem is addressed?
The people who lives around this area absolutely benefits from the action/problem of question and research. However, the criminal might wins if the problem is addressed. But, there is another point to be noted that that could be a win-win situation. It is installing massive of surveillance cameras at the street and monitoring the people and analyzing what they are doing. Then, police office should question and search them.

Zhi(Tony) D. Li link

5/23/2014 08:55:24 am

continue from the above post

From your perspective explain why?
On my perspective, the police has been addressed this issue pretty well. For instance, the police used surveillance cameras monitoring and analyzing people. In our Hayward campus, there are lost of cameras on the sidewalk, parking lots, even in dinging halls. By doing this, police is achieving a win-win situation and making sure that no one gets hurts.

Bree Hart

5/23/2014 11:30:16 am

I chose to do Case Study #2. This is a social & political problem because it affects everyone; women, men, black, white, and mexican. This is a problem because police are not suspecting everyone and anyone, and they are humiliating women by doing these "stop and frisk" tactic. Police feel as if they have the right to do this because they are the law and are trying to protect the public, but it is actually stereotypical and humiliating. We have learned about two types of things that relate to this problem. We once talked about S.B. 1070 which was racial profiling for illegal immigrants (not just Latinos, but any "foreigner"in general) in Arizona. But we also talked about Mass Surveillance, though we think of Mass Surveillance as just people watching us through our phones and computers, police can also be another form of mass surveillance. Police watch people more than average people watch others, so they of course see the things you are doing at certain times of the day.
We have discussed so many topics that relate to this db post. I think this political problem exists because of police are never really trained to deal with racial profiling the right way. I think nobody persists from this problem, I mean cops get to know who is carrying weapons and not. The public wins when the problem is addressed, because they are able to walk in public without feeling like they are getting profiled.

Roxana Chavez

5/23/2014 01:54:41 pm

I definitely agree with the concept that this exists because of racial profiling. I completely forgot that this could be another reason other than the fact that the police may be abusing their power over the stop and frisk procedure. Your reasons definitely support as to what problems that we discussed in class could relate to the problem, and could be very supportive in your paper, along with including personal examples, if any, and research found on cases that have allowed the stop and frisk procedure on neighborhoods.

Brenda Rangel

5/25/2014 04:34:29 pm

I agree with you in terms that stop and frisk leads to racial profiling because we are leaving judgment in the hands of individuals that can abuse their power. This creates fear and panic within communities, which has been discussed in our blogs and in class discussions.

ddoan2@horizon.csueastbay.edu

5/23/2014 12:39:19 pm

I’m doing case #2, the stop and frisk search pose a social and political problem. The problem seemingly does not pertain to women only yet it’s more of an unnecessary search that is unwarranted for. This is a social problem because police is stopping and searching civilian that they feel are suspects. It is a problem in the police force because they are targeting a certain look. However, I feel that women are not the targets because women officers pat women down. In a sense the police are only stopping people who they feel warranted a search, which is not right. This policy does not prevent crimes also. This can also be a political problem because the police will use their power in the neighborhood where they feel is the problem. They will abuse the power of stop and frisk. What I read is that this problem will not go away, because due to the crime rates in the area, this policy will be in effect. The political problem exists because the government cannot find a good solution to deal the crime neighborhoods. Most of the crime rates are in the low-income area of Oakland. The only people who benefits from this is the police because now if they go out and stop and frisk an innocent person. They can use the policy because it is there for them to use it. It basically gives them more of a power over civilians. So now police walks around and think they can do whatever they want.

Tikerea Tate

5/26/2014 06:14:17 pm

I agree with your post. I especially agree when you said it "gives them more power over the civilians". I agree with the so much because stop and frisk is only one thing that police officers abuse which prevents them from doing their job which is to serve and protect. Stop and frisk will never help anything because some police officers are more worried about there pride rather than citizens. Once the stop and frisk policy stops being abused by officers there will be a change in crime on the streets and maybe even a more higher level of respect for police officers.

Travis Himebaugh

5/23/2014 01:05:21 pm

I chose to focus on the first case issue (the one on poor waste management near poor neighborhoods) because it strikes a chord with me personally.

If a poorer neighborhood is being used to dump hazardous materials against regulations, that is certainly a social issue because it represents a mistreatment perpetuated against people by other people, and it needs to be addressed to ensure equal living for others. It is also undeniably a political issue because the stance of the government is not counter to this kind of activity; if there is no specific crackdown on these issues, it is likely that enforcement against them is lax.

This kind of thing is exactly what we spoke of in class. The mindset of passive consent is precisely the mindset that allows this kind of thing to happen. Poorer communities, particularly immigrant communities uncertain of their place in an unfamiliar country, are unlikely to protest mistreatment, and thus it continues. Dissent, the mindset of reacting, of rallying government support to combat this mistreatment, is the solution we discussed in class. In short, we need to be aware of problems and we need to stand up against them.

I think this problem exists not because of malice but because of selfishness. Some company tasked with disposal decided not to pay fully to ensure total safety. Consequently human life is jeopardized. This is typical of unregulated business in America; healthcare insurance struggled to find loopholes to avoid parting with money, and consequently many people suffered. The companies in charge of disposal benefit because they do not have to pay as much and can keep more profit- thus, from their perspective, they are winning the "game" of business competition. The owners of the poor immigrant housing (slumlords) also benefit from a lack of health that keeps the poor unhealthy, uninformed, and poor, shackling them to their developments that encourage poor health, lack of information, and poverty. I wish I could say that addressing this problem would allow them to win as well as the immigrants, but frankly it wouldn't- the only way they win their game is for everyone else to lose.

Frank Arredondo

5/23/2014 01:08:05 pm

After looking over all the cases I was having trouble deciding which one to take on. Finally I decided to look at case study #2 which was the action taken by police following a large number of gunpoint robberies. Their response was to place a policy that allowed officers to “stop-and-frisk” right on the spot when they where suspicious. What has been discovered through this case was that a large number of stops have been women who have been wrongfully stopped and humiliated by the frisking happening in public. These actions have been compared to the case of SB1070, which has been used in Arizona when it comes police officers stopping individuals and asking for prof of residency within the United States. Which has been seen through studying of racial discrimination. Yet in this case though a curveball has been thrown in when it is women being stopped and frisked. What we have heard as described in the text is an abuse of power and authority. The major issue this turns into is a lack of trust in authorities within a community, and when that happens the community no longer wants to work with authorities to catch the real bad guys. No who benefits with this issue is really no one. No one can benefit by these continually happening to women within the community. Officers like stated earlier will lose trust, and the women within or community are being abused and it hurts them and frustrates everyone else. In all it will create a community that is dysfunctional, because the community to should partner with the officers to clean up the neighborhoods from the “cancers” who make it unsafe.

augustus castro

5/26/2014 09:24:44 am

I feel when it comes to a point in a community or many of them it is important to recognize when law enforcement stops working for the people. In cast study #2 the legitimacy of the stop and frisk type searches seem to render results that dont necessarily help the cause of gun control. Most of these targets have been women and in whatever probable cause these officers had seems to victimize women in their efforts.Not just in a stereotypical profiling, but in an inhumane way that americans regardless of state or status should have to endure.

Leslie Werle

5/23/2014 01:26:40 pm

I googled illegal dumping in low income neighborhoods and was floored by the amount of articles that popped up; articles from Philadelphia, New Haven, Detroit, New York. This is a huge social and health issue. This illegal dumping comes from industrial companies and from low income residents who can’t afford legal garbage disposal. Much that happens in these low income neighborhoods is a tragic circle that is so hard to break out of. This problem exists because the poor neighborhoods don’t have the power or money to make people hear them or to abide by the rules in their jurisdiction. Many corporations will take advantage of this, in more than just illegal dumping, because they can. This problem persists because these neighborhoods don’t have the resources to stop it. The corporations have so much power in our world that they can make sure this problem is not properly addressed. So not addressing it helps the corporations and addressing it would help the families in these low income neighborhoods where illegal dumping is happening. I also came across many articles that linked illegal dumping with numerous health problems in children.

Roxana Chavez

5/23/2014 01:49:20 pm

I am focusing on case study number two. In various occasions, this has become a both a social and political problem. For example, the social part of this case is the fact that it could invade people’s privacy without having a good reason to do so. In this case, the stop-and-frisk should only be used if and only if there is suspicious activity. As for the political part of this case study, police abuse their power to constantly use the stop-and-frisk on anyone they would like to and plus the fact that this procedure is very vague. What I mean is that there aren’t regulations as to when police are allowed to use this, which leads as to why I think this political problem exists. Police quickly put this on demand because of a rise on violent crimes, but what should have been done along with the quick decision of allowing the stop-and-frisk are listing regulations as to who and when the police could use this procedure. Without regulations, police can technically argue the fact that no regulations have been set for them and that therefore, all they are doing is taking extra precaution, and that it has no connection to the higher proportion of women who have gone through this procedure. This concept reminds me of the discussion we had in class about how politicians, laws, etc. could state something that could actually mean to be very vague. In my perspective, if the problem persists, this could benefit the police because of the fact they will feel as if they have such power over society rather than following their job description, which is to provide safety to the people. If the problem were addressed, the people that live in this neighborhood area and around would definitely benefit from it, knowing that police can be regulated and safety really can be provided to them.

Elizabeth Avalos

5/23/2014 02:04:20 pm

I have selected Case Study #2.
Simply defined, the "stop-and-frisk" law allows police officers who are reasonably suspicious that a detainee could potentially be armed and dangerous to perform an over-the-clothes pat-down on him/her. This policy has become a social and political issue because it has played what appears to be a pivotal role in the high percentage of women who have been stopped by male officers, for whatever their suspicions may be, and have subjected them to "humiliating body frisks." This quarter we have discussed the topic of privacy, both through technology, in the case of Snowden, and physical, in the case of Arizona's racial profiling law. This Case Study tells us that this law has been created because a rise in robberies at gunpoint and other weapon inclusive crimes has been noticed. However, although the rate of guns found on women is especially low, women are suffering harassment and humiliation. By subjecting its citizens to as many searching and questioning procedures as possible, police and authorities are benefiting from this law.

Alvin Luna

5/23/2014 03:37:05 pm

I agree with you that if this persists that the police and authorities are benefiting rather than the citizens. I think you should stay on that track and talk about how the police is frisking rather than looking out for the best interest of the people. I understand the paranoia that police might have from concealed weapons but if you could focus on why they go overboard when they frisk, that would help make your argument stronger.

Christopher

5/23/2014 02:32:06 pm

I think that case study number two raises multiple issues, mainly: why does crime exist and why is violent crime on the increase, how do we respond to crime as a society and why, and what are the consequences of said responses? In answer to the first question, I think it is important to establish the connection between crime and poverty, economic inequality, and class oppression. This is well documented. I would liken our approach to dealing with crime and injustice to an amateur gardener who, seeing that his garden has a weed problem, removes only the tops of the plants, leaving the roots. The way in which we choose to respond to crime illustrates this practice. Since America’s “Tough on Crime” criminal justice policies began in the late 60’s during president Nixon’s term, the tendency has been towards reactionary and preemptive police measures. This has meant less of a focus on rehabilitation, preventative, and restorative justice. The consequences of practices such as stop and frisk extend both into the social and political realm. Politically speaking, Stop and Frisk has been critiqued as in violation of both fourth and fourteenth amendment rights. In cities where it has been implemented as policy, it has also been statistically shown to disproportionately target people of color. In New York City, for example, a federal judge ruled that stop and frisk tactics were unconstitutional as they violated the rights of minorities in the city. Between 2002 and 2014, nearly an average of roughly 80% of those stopped were People of Color. Nine out of ten of all those stopped were innocent of any crime or violation. To me this seems like a tendency in government lately, whether it is in criminal justice, matters of war, or of national security: stopping a problem before there even is one. Police policies like this and other dragnet tactics imply a move towards a form of government where we are not innocent until proven guilty. It is a reversal of the power dynamics that were (supposedly) written in to our constitution.

Alvin Luna

5/23/2014 03:32:53 pm

I chose to focus on Case Study #3 on building roads that dwell into residential areas. This is a major social problem because although there will be buildings that are needed, the price paid for that would be the comfort of someone's own home. What was discussed in class helps me understand the issue because we talked a bit about how the government isn't fair. They do things that might be good for business but not so good for the public just like in this case.I think this political problem exists because there is a lack of common ground. The best interest of the people is being looked after but it seems that there are no alternatives where both business that are needed and the comfort of the public can co-exist. This is kind of a tough question to gauge because there are benefits either way. The neighborhood needs a grocery store for fresh produce, so they'll get that but there will constantly be traffic around their residential area. If the mall isn't built, they won't have fresh produce but their neighborhood will be traffic free.If the problem is addressed, perhaps the neighborhood can completely win because they will have the mall that they need as well as being able to drive home without having to worry about traffic.

Nico Passalacqua

5/26/2014 11:43:18 am

I agree. I believe that government is often one-sighted and selfish when it comes to choosing between the American people and themselves. It seems that the public comes at the price of businesses being successful, not only in this instance, but in the overall scheme of things. For example, corporations and their enormous, influential power to exploit workers and businesses.

Alan Fernandez

5/26/2014 03:45:10 pm

Alvin, I agree with your point that government can and often does put the desires of corruptions before the needs of the people. I feel that sometimes government comes to the wants of business and corruptions and prevents that it for the good of the people. In this example, I ask myself with does their new to be a mall in order to built a grocery store. Why is it that the mayor does work on a comprise where a grocery store is built but a mall is not as not to increase traffic but still meet the communities needs. Why is it that the wants of corruption always come first, and any benefit to the community is just consequence or consolation prize?

Joann Truong

5/23/2014 03:39:57 pm

This “stop-and-frisk” policy is stupid. I feel like that is taking away our rights and that it violates the second amendment, the rights to bear arms. The fact that these MALE police officers are purposely stopping women and frisking them is disgusting. The promotion of this policy would likely increase the chances of sexual advances that police officers can make towards female civilians, considering that there have been cases like these in the past. Police officers are just trying to make a joke out of something serious and they’re just abusing their powers as authority and it makes me sick. We leave our lives in the hands of dirty, abusive police officers who can’t take responsibilities for their actions. Civil right leaders should argue that it is unjustice because it is unjustice. Stopping random people with no probable cause should not be okay because some people who know that they haven’t done anything wrong will be refused deny confrontation if they feel like they want to avoid conversation with a cop. What I found out was that it happened in New York City. Even though right now, it doesn’t affect me because I live in San Leandro but I believe that it will catch the eyes of police officers here and they will start to do that as well. I’ve read that this stop and frisk policy hasn’t even made the problem and better, it has not gotten any more guns off the street then before the policy started. I feel like since people know about this stop and frisk policy, they are more aware and won’t carry guns on them as often or they’ll be more cautious.

Eduardo Ruiz

5/23/2014 04:17:00 pm

I will be working on case study number two. The social problem that the stop and frisk policy is that it racial profiles a certain group of people, mainly black and Latinos. This problem exists because of the governments huge push to remove guns and drugs of the streets, but falsely accuses innocent people, mostly young men of black and Latin decent. I have been racial profiled twice in my life once while walking and the other while driving and both times I was specifically asked if I was carrying marijuana, even though I have never done drugs. I was not searched but the officers did take a very big sniff of me and inside my car. Now I don’t think anybody benefits from this because the police could be out stopping and preventing actual serious crimes, but statistically speaking young men of color are arrested more often for drug related crimes than anyone else but that is because racial profiling has been happening for a very long time.

Elizabeth Avalos

5/26/2014 01:36:13 pm

I'm sorry to hear that you've had to deal with this issue on multiple occasions. My brothers work in Marin city, which from their feedback can have very racist residents and authorities, and they have also been pulled over on multiple occasions for what they consider no legitimate reason. My brothers, who are Mexican, were pulled over and given rather poor excuses as to why they were being pulled over. They were both let off with warnings, on two separate occasions, but they too felt like it was more a case of racial profiling rather than actually breaking any type of law.

Frank Arredondo

5/26/2014 03:57:27 pm

It is a weird situation when someone of authority profiles you. You get placed in a situation of due I get seriously pissed off at you right now, and make my situation worse or do I except it? I speak on this because I have been racially profiled several times. Yet, it isn’t so much of why or what happened, but I think of the feelings I had. As well makes me too think of how these women would feel being wrongfully frisked, by male officers. What do you do in that situation? Do you get so pissed off that you go out of control and get arrested for assaulting an officer, or do you do nothing? This is the question I have trouble answering, because at times when we want to do something later to report the situation it is either to late. Other times though we are told we do not have enough evidence to do anything to press charges making many not even want to try.

Leon Fraser

5/23/2014 04:28:27 pm

I believe case number two is a social problem, involving the increase in stopping and frisking by police. Police who abuse their power when stopping and frisking everyone they see, not only does this lead to an invasion of privacy but racial profiling and sexual assault plays a part in the abuse of stopping and frisking. African American along with Mexicans is usually targeted for racial profiling due to stereotypes. Women are also being stopped and frisked and cannot do anything while some corrupted cops sexual assault them. Being a victim of a stop and frisk assault can lead some people to feel like a criminal. With surveillance, technology has advanced so much that spying on people is much easier which also make stopping and frisking more common. The government thinks that an increase in surveillance would protect civilians yet with all this surveillance some police officers get away with harassing people in general. I learned that increasing the amount of stopping and frisking could be a big problem. People of different cultures not only have their privacy invaded but they have to sit by and be treated like criminals while police officers abuse their power. I believe this is a political problem because the government enforces laws and since police officers were told to stop and frisk every suspicious person they see it shows that it is an ok from the government that police officers are allowed to do it. If citizens stand together we can speak on this issue because we live in The United States we are free to speak up on political and social problems thanks to the constitution and if citizen who look suspicious but are not suspicious yet their being treated like criminals, that would only have people fearing that they would be profiled as a criminal including being violated by corrupted cops more often.

Joann Truong

5/26/2014 04:43:15 pm

I totally agree with what you're saying because I'm doing case number two too. Stop and frisk is totally unfair. Police don't just stop and frisk anyone, they stop and frisk people who look "suspicious" and by doing that, they must racially profile people and that's not okay. That is racist and sexist. I thought America was about equality, why are we still doing this. This is proves that America hasn’t changed at all.

Brenda Rangel

5/23/2014 04:46:21 pm

The second case study drew my attention due to the controversy behind the stop and frisk policy. This policy is in place in New York, were African American men were being stopped for simply looking “suspicious”. The policy allows police officers to stop anyone with probable cause, leading to cases of racial profiling; policies such as these leave judgment to the discretion of the officer. In the case of women, you are stepping into an area in which women could experience harassment and sexual abuse; these do not necessarily lead to women accusing officers. Stop and frisk set up a fear within communities, police officer may over use the policy. The readings touch on the relationship of power and politics; we are giving officers greater power and in some sense political power in the communities. Also, brings the issue of surveillance plays a significant role in this, as stop and frisk place officers in a greater position to stop any individual perceived as being “suspicious or dangerous”. Current, the police department have come under great scrutiny with the excessive use of force, which creates a panic among civilians.

Leslie Ann Ong

5/23/2014 05:37:54 pm

The case-study I am interested in addressing is case two regarding the "stop and frisk" policy. This policy is both a social and political issue and is similar to our class discussions about the controversy between government surveillance and invasion of privacy. Although the police have the legal right to stop and frisk individuals, it seems the police in this case-study have stepped over the line of security. Granted, police have to do their jobs and pat down suspicious individuals, however, the high percent of women being frisked compared to the low rate of guns being found on both men and women do not add up. There are many controversies surrounding this issue, one being how women would feel uncomfortable around police instead of protected. The thought of women becoming subjected to humiliating pat-downs may become embedded into a woman's consciousness as soon as she steps out of the front door. Although the stop and frisk policy is legally justified, once the point in which women feel uncomfortable around legal authorities raises a red flag and a change in policy has to occur. This policy exists for increased safety measures, so at surface level, the benefit of protection is expected from this policy. Though a pat-down does seem reasonable, there is also the possibility of the power abuse, which is why this becomes an issue at one point. If this policy persists, nobody is a winner, because the system is skewed in a way that citizens begin to fear their government unless a change in policy occurs.

Alan Ferandez

5/23/2014 06:12:07 pm

I have chosen to write about the second case because the extreme abuse of power that is shown in this case, and the social problem of police brutality, and "stop-and-frisk" searches. We can apply the ideas of police power and position in society that police have. We can look at how society puts police at place of unquestionable authority, and allow them to do most whatever the want, thought fear, only acting during extreme cases. We can also apply the issues of gender discrimination, as even women are shown to have lower rate of crime they were criminalized by the police officers without taking account the consequences such invasive search could have on the women's psyche. In class, we talked about hate and discrimination we touch of the mostly defeated, and unjust law of Arizona SB 1070. During the discussion, we discussed that the most unfair thing about the law is that it allowed for race discrimination by allowing police officers to violate a person's privacy by asking for legal document of residence at any time with the treat of deportation simply on what the officer saw, and assumed looked as "illegal" which due to racism and untrue fears was actual code wording for brown skin Hispanics. This law put police officers at very unfair and lethal levels of power within their communities. The same could be well be apply to what the "stop-and- frisk" searches allowed in the communities to happened but with women instead of Hispanics. This problem I believe steams from a institutional problem of police departments that lack the proper instruction in how to behave when in a position of power, and get rid of or at least no enact with racism ,and sexist stereotypes that we come to learn as part of become a member of society in the United States along with a societal problem were women as still lower as men, and that is still found in instinct based police officers as "okay" to abuse. As shown in studies, there are still racism practices occurring with police officers, and the non-model minorities such Latinos, and Black Americans are still the most likely to be arrest or thrown in jail. If the problem of "stop-and-frisk" searches as not deal with they might be small benefits for the community as they is likely to be a decrease in gun related crimes in the community, but the real winners will be the police department as they will be able to say that the took action against the violence crimes, but I would argue that their are even greater benefits for the community as it will truly restore the felling of safety in the community in that their privacy will not be violated, and it will increase their truss in with their police department. My perspective come from my experience with police, and when I worked with police the respect I felt increased my truss with them, and actually made my house safer as I felt that I could relay on the police when trouble comes.

Tikerea Tate

5/24/2014 02:26:46 pm

I decided to do problem two, the issue of stop and frisk. This is a social problem because it is happening so much and is effecting everyone in the society. Police are changing what their number job to serve and protect. The discussions in class has help me understand the issue because I was only seeing the basic problems of everything. With my knowledge from the class I learned that the problem is deeper then what it seems. I am also taking a Criminal Justice right now, community policing, and it really helps me understand what is going on. Right now police are the only people benefiting from the problem because they are meeting their “quota” or gaining pride from doing things they are not suppose to be doing. If I point “wins” then society will be winning because we deserve to have someone protecting us not be afraid or the people are suppose to be protecting.

Nico Passalacqua

5/26/2014 11:39:37 am

Stop and frisk practices raise serious concerns over individual civil liberties. The Center for Constitutional Rights has conducted a series of interviews that provide evidence of how deeply the practice of stop and frisk impacts individuals, both men and women, with regard to civil and human rights abuses, including illegal profiling, improper arrests, inappropriate touching, sexual harassment, humiliation and violence at the hands of the police officers. The effects of these abuses can be devastating and often leave behind lasting emotional, psychological, social and economic harm.

One idea from the reading that applies to case study #2 is The Fourth Amendment, Searches, Seizures, and the Exclusionary Rule. It declares that “The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrant 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.” Second, is a more general idea that applies to women’s inequalities throughout the course of history and how they are subject to more cruel and unusual acts of unjust behavior, for example, their inability o vote or their right to own and inherit property.

I believe this political problem exists because of women’s inherent status as inferior and the arduous struggle they have attempted to oppose for generations. The unequal treatment of women is a widespread and systematic human and civil rights violation. In this particular situation, due to the police officers’ presumed authority, this type of behavior is excused.

I don’t think anyone benefits from this problem persisting; it is an unfortunate, inhumane reality that women are treated as unequal individuals. If the problem is thoroughly addressed, through state governments and federal governments, women win. The inequalities exemplified in the workplace, government, sports, and so forth would not hinder women’s ability to succeed and the structure of society would change to more fairly distribute opportunities and rewards.

Dolly Perez

6/8/2014 06:53:31 pm

I think that case study number two is both a social and political problem. Giving police officers the authority to stop and frisk people violates citizen’s civil rights and civil liberties to some extent. I feel that this is also another way to close and opened society. This allows for officers to have more power over minorities because this is mainly targeted against people of color. This power seems to be used and abused to take advantage of minorities. This doesn’t help solve the issue with robberies happening the streets instead this creates a bigger issue than be is already is. I think the police offers benefit from this mostly in negative ways because now more people of color who seem to look like a suspect to some degree will get pulled over and also women are another target. Women are another target because this allows for me to stop females and check them. But male some male officers will take advantage of this power and abuse it.

augustus castro

6/10/2014 03:24:25 pm

I chose case number three for the final exam for a variety of personal reasons and what came to mind in the description of a lower income area being the dump site for pollution and waste of local business is my home town of Imperial beach being next to the border and the consequences of a developing nation adjacent to a more economically stable one. Although the border is a divide the ocean the lines the coast along southern California allows for free flowing pollution excreted from Mexico that ultimately ends up in US waters. Every time it rains new introductions of sewage and pollution and local beaches are closed stating health risks associated with them. Not only over the border but domestically in the down town area of San Diego is centered its industry around the bay which causes additional introductions of pollution and emissions from local businesses. This relates to case 1 by having outsourced businesses practiced outside of the country while having lessened pollution and disposal restrictions to produce more pollution and waste than what is dealt with. Luckily Coalitions like Wild Coast in my town are striving to expose pollution and discontinue the improper disposal techniques that are currently held this side of the border as well as helping refurbish infrastructure of waste management in Tijuana and other parts of Mexico. This also means that with proper fundraising and the mobilization of over 10,000 volunteers collectively organizations like this one and other environmental interest groups can make a larger impact with community support and action.

Final exam outline blog (week 8)

Leave a Reply.

POSC 1201

Archives

Categories

THE BEAUTY

OF BLACK

CREATION

ABOUT US

JOURNALS

SUBMISSIONS

Final exam outline blog (week 8)

Leave a Reply.

POSC 1201

Archives

Categories

THE BEAUTYOF BLACKCREATION

ABOUT USJOURNALS​​SUBMISSIONS

THE BEAUTY

OF BLACK

CREATION

ABOUT US

JOURNALS

SUBMISSIONS