Do Stop and Searches Breach Our Privacy?

Since it was first introduced, the stop and search method of countering criminal offense has sparked a barbarous debate as to whether these searches are morally serious. Happening almost daily, the answer continues to be very controversial, with many claiming that stop and searches breach our right to privacy. In the next couple of paragraphs, I shall attempt to answer the question do stop and searches breach our privacy? and learn a particular to a greater extent about the controversial topic.Depending on where in the UK one lives, one is believably to be stopped and searched at least once in their emotional state by a police officer it has become an inevitable fact. When told by an officer that they are going to be searched in public, a individual is given a number of key rights and responsibilities. Both the former and the last mentioned are obvious the right to be told the officers defecate and police station, the right to receive a receipt from the officer about the search, the right to not be strip searched in public, and the right to be searched by an officer of the said(prenominal) sex, as well as the responsibility to comply with the police, to not put out or abuse the officers, to take off all garments when asked to (only up to a jacket never trousers or a shirt), and the responsibility to tell them your name and address.This fairly ordinary occurrence happens all the time, and is, for many, a regular occasion. It whitethorn seem like a harmless, if slightly annoying, chore. Unfortunately, when one looks a bitty deeper into the facts and statistics, there seems to be a racially-motivated reason why some sociable groups are more searched than differents black people are six time more likely to be stopped and searched than white people, and Asians are double as likely. Most people are searched under the Police and woeful Evidence Act, which gives police officers the permission to perform the act randomly with anybody they risible of carrying drugs or concea guide weapons. The stubbornly high levels are shocking as it would seem that, according to members of the police force, people from ethnic minority groups are more likely to carry illegal drugs or items.This prejudice has led to more fierce debate and is, quite simply, unfair. Many people fervency stop and searches due to this fact, claiming that this racially-motivated trend is ridiculously cruel, and out-dated for modern western ordination. another(prenominal) argument against the stop and search procedure is one that criticises the lack of evidence that proves that ethnic minorities are more likely to be involved in crime it is simply not excusable for officers to base their reasonable suspicion on own(prenominal) beliefs. A final argument is the low reduction of crime caused by the search, with crime rates dropping by only 0.2%.On the other hand, many claim that it is a necessary way to prevent crime, and is justifiable as an officer should know who is more likely to commit offenses. slightly also believe that due to the large amount of crime maybe prevented by stop and searches (in 2009 14,700 people were arrested and 7,500 knives were recovered) the whole thing has helped to make society a safer place.In conclusion, it seems clear that the stop and search method is wrong and has little impact on criminals, and despite the amount of crime prevented, the whole procedure is unnecessary, unfair, bullying, and inefficient.