So...now you're pointing to a tv series... Ok, well let's assume your assertions are factual for a moment. If the criminals, are so good at hiding their activities, How is it again that all of these stops and frisks are a viable tactic? Presumably, if the tv show is accurate, then cops should know what effectively amounts to randomly stopping people would be ineffective.
Why would it be difficult to maintain or manage on a large scale? Policy based dysfunction hardly requires management, just the passivity to allow it to happen or the belief that it's a good thing.
Quote:
In a harshly critical report, a special mayoral panel asserted yesterday that the New York City Police Department had failed at every level to uproot corruption and had instead tolerated a culture that fostered misconduct and concealed lawlessness by police officers.
The panel, called the Mollen Commission, agreed with police officials who contend that corruption was not systemic, but rather isolated to small groups of rogue officers. But the commission warned that if corruption itself was not systemwide, the department's failure to address it was.
|
source If not so long ago there was massive failure to deal with a whole different level of patently illegal activity by officers(preceded by the earlier knapp commission in the 70's).It would be relatively easy to fail to address abuse of detainments and searches, which are not just passively allowed, but actively endorsed by the superiors. To believe without evidence that the NYPD is simply too large to do wrong is short sighted and ignorant of the history of the NYPD. It's size does nothing to prevent missteps and failures on a departmental level.
Sure a department that collaborates
internationally and operates
outside of their jurisdictional area without prior approval could never be modeled by other departments or affect areas outside their jurisdiction.
