The city of New York has been engaged for years in the practice of halting those with dark skins in order to check them for lethal arms. It is a well known fact that those with other than white skins are the greatest number of criminals in the United States of America. Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled this practice violated the constitutional rights of black Americans and Hispanics. However, a federal appeals court over turned her ruling on ground that she was a biased person. Not only did they halt her decision but they took her off the case. Let me get this right, over 800,000 cases of stop and frisk reveal that 90% of those being halted were other than white skinned people. If one allows people to be halted and frisked this is considered to be free of any form of bias. But, if one rules that frisking of blacks and Hispanics is OK, then one is free of bias.
Reality: Cities which stop and frisk and cities which do not stop and frisk wind up with about the same percentage of crime. Why? Stop and frisk has nothing to do with crime rates. Crime automatically drops when the age cohort, 18-27 is smaller. Crime rates go down when “crimes” such as gambling or use of marijuana are legalized. That is factually true.