There is a solution to the "stop-and-frisk" controversy.
Let's end stop-and-frisk in the five places where the most stop-and-frisk activity is conducted. Places like East New York, Brownsville and Bed-Stuy. Clearly these are all areas where Al Sharpton gets more respect and carries a lot more weight than Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
These are areas where hundreds, maybe thousands, of deaths have been averted as a result of stop-and-frisk.
These are areas where the greatest number of victims of black-on-black crime live.
The argument that only a fraction of guns are found during stop-and-frisk operations in these areas is ridiculous.
The reason a lot of punks are not carrying guns is because they are afraid a random stop-and-frisk search will lead to their arrest. They leave their guns at home in hiding places where they can't hurt or maim anyone. End stop-and-frisk and they will carry their guns at all times and people will die.
However, we must put an end to stop-and-frisk where vote-hungry politicians and local area people want it stopped, no matter what the repercussions.
This is not to abandon these people. In fact, to best protect the people in these high-violent-crime zones, let's place a disproportionate number of police to patrol these neighborhoods 24/7 because we must try as hard as we can to protect the vast majority of decent people who live there.
However, in the future, in those high-crime areas, the police must ignore suspicious punks and gang members who they suspect may be carrying guns. If these punks are carrying guns, it's their business. No stop-and-frisk. And should they shoot and kill each other – or some innocent – we must do everything to apprehend them before they can kill again.
But most important, we must keep the violence from spilling out into the entire city.
This is why we must have a strong stop-and-frisk policy in all the "low-crime" areas of the city. Greenwich Village, Brooklyn Heights, the Upper East Side, Flatbush, Ocean Parkway, Queens Boulevard, Flushing, the Riverdale section of the Bronx, etc. etc.
To put an end to the "profiling" charge, let's also instruct the police that for every black and Latino they stop and frisk in these low-crime sections, they must stop an equal number of whites, Asians, Swedes, Norwegians, Italians, Jews, etc.
This should be a popular move with everyone because, lo and behold, the most vocal politicians who want to put and end to stop-and-frisk – U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin, Al Sharpton, Christine Quinn, Bill De Blasio – do not live in the high-crime areas where black-on-black or Latino-against-Latino violent shootings are more likely to occur.
They live in low-crime neighborhoods where their families can be safe. They always talk the talk, they never walk the walk.
In a sense these politicians are fishing for votes from those people whose children and babies will be in the line of fire the minute stop-and-frisk is eliminated.
So what do we hope to accomplish with this plan?
Although we can't hope to keep murders and major crimes at the current historic lows, and we won't be able to save the lives of many young blacks and Hispanics by removing guns from our streets, we can, by protecting low-crime areas from senseless violence, keep New York City from turning into Detroit.
Once, Detroit was a safe city.
Then in 1974, Coleman Young was elected Mayor.
He pitted black against white.
Rich against poor.
He attacked the police force.
He disbanded a police operation called STRESS (Stop the Robberies and Enjoy Safe Streets). He said it was unjustly targeting African-Americans.
In time, Detroit came to be called "the most dangerous city in the country."
Middle-class black families and white families left the city in droves.
You know the rest.
If you wish to comment on "Jerry's Ink" please send your message to firstname.lastname@example.org.