Despite Claims of Bias, Pretextual Traffic Stops Reduce Crime

For decades, police reform activists have decried the injustice of “pretextual” traffic stops, in which officers pull over drivers for minor traffic infractions as a pretext for investigating them for more significant crimes. These stops, activists claim, are a form of racial profiling.

But in Oakland, California, evidence suggests that reductions in traffic stops show mixed results on reducing racial disparities while dramatically increasing crime. From 2016 to the present, traffic stops have plummeted in Oakland by 80%. Meanwhile, crime has risen by 30%, according to a study by Timothy Gardner, an Oakland resident with a PhD in Biomedical Engineering. (See Table 1, Table 2)

Traffic stops are particularly significant because they are the principal way that police initiate contact with civilians, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. They are thus the most common way for police officers to intercept criminal suspects proactively.

Gardner predicts that close to 300 additional car thefts occur in Oakland monthly as a result of the drop in traffic stops. The rise in this particular crime is noteworthy since stolen cars are routinely used to commit further crimes. A rise in car thefts thus tends to mean a rise in other categories of crime as well.

Read More:

• https://public.substack.com/p/why-have-cops-have-stopped-pulling