Editing Driving while black (section)

==Pretextual stop==
In a [[pretextual stop]] (also called an investigatory stop), officers pull over people citing a minor issue, then start asking unrelated questions. University of Kansas professor Charles Epp in a study found that black drivers were three times more likely than whites to be subjected to "pretextual" stops, and five times more likely to be searched during them. However, Epp found no difference in the frequency and treatment with which black and white drivers were stopped for serious violations like speeding. The bias, however, was significant for stops over minor issues such as a broken tail light, a missing front plate or a failure to signal a lane change.<ref name="TheStar-2016-07-11">{{cite news |url=https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2016/07/11/for-black-americans-police-traffic-stops-far-from-routine.html |title=For black Americans, police traffic stops far from 'routine' |newspaper=[[Toronto Star]] |author=Daniel Dale |date=11 July 2016 |access-date=2016-07-11}}</ref>

For example, [[Philando Castile]] had 52 police stops in 14 years prior to the last fatal stop. Half of his charges were dismissed, and none of his convictions were for dangerous offences. The pretext for the fatal stop was a broken tail light, but the real reason was that the police officer thought Castile resembled a robbery suspect.<ref name="TheStar-2016-07-11"/>

The Supreme Court ruled in ''[[Whren v. United States]]'' (1996) that any minor traffic violation is a legitimate justification for a stop, even if the real reason is some other crime-fighting objective. Police chiefs consider pretextual stops as an essential tactic and train their officers to conduct them.<ref name="TheStar-2016-07-11"/>

According to an October 2015 article in ''The New York Times'', many police departments use traffic stops as a tool to make contact with the community often in higher crime areas where more African-Americans live. Police hope that by being proactive, criminals will avoid the area. However, criminologists argue that such police stops alienate law-abiding residents and undermine their trust in the police. Traffic stops often lead to searches, arrests and convictions often for minor offences, with a police record that can lead to lifelong difficulties. This makes it difficult for police to obtain community cooperation in preventing and solving crimes. Criminologists doubt that performing more traffic stops leads to reduced crime. Ronald L. Davis, of the Justice Department's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services said: "There is no evidence that just increasing stops reduces crime."<ref name="NYT-2015-10-25">{{cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/us/racial-disparity-traffic-stops-driving-black.html?_r=1 |title=The Disproportionate Risks of Driving While Black |work=[[The New York Times]] |author1=Sharon LaFraniere  |author2=Andrew W. Lehren |date=25 October 2015 |access-date=2016-07-21 }}</ref>