Stop and frisk: Good police work or racial profiling?

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," August 19, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: On Martin case and the up for over stand-your-ground laws. Now, another law coming under intense national scrutiny and that is stop-and-frisk. Last week, a federal judge banned New York Police Department from using the crime-fighting tool saying it targets minorities. Yesterday, Trayvon Martin's mother and the head of the NAACP spoke out in support of the ruling.


SYBRINA FULTON: I think you have to give not only civilians but you have to give the police officers the right direction. You can't deal with people to authority whether civilian or police officers the right to just stop somebody because of the color of their skin.

BENJAMIN JEALOUS: Just because there are more murders in our community doesn't mean that you can treat all of us like we are guilty.


GUILFOYLE: NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly argues however that it's minorities who are in danger without stop-and-frisk.


RAY KELLY, NYPD COMMISSIONER: The losers in this -- if this case is allowed to stand, are people who live in minority communities. 97 percent of the shooting victims in New York City last year were people of color, black or Latino.


GUILFOYLE: Kelly also issued a warning yesterday for why the rest of America should care.


KELLY: This happens throughout America in any police jurisdiction. You have to do it. Officers have to have the right of inquiry if they see some suspicious behavior. And this case has to be appealed on my judgment because it will be taken as a template and have significant impact in pleasing throughout America.


GUILFOYLE: I agree with Ray Kelly. Bolling what's your thoughts on this?

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: You know, I did a ton of research like for real, I pulled up -- had the brainer more with me. I took the top 10 most populous cities in the country, New York, L.A., Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia then I matched against whether they have stop-and-frisk, and then I matched it further against what their violent crime rates were and I'm really -- I guess on Friday, I was really in favor of the stop-and-frisk.

And I got to tell you this guy is something. Some of the cities with the highest violent crime rates have stop-and-frisk. So, I went a step further and I took the top cities, the most dangerous cities like Michigan, Detroit, Oakland, St. Louis, Memphis, Stockton.

It turns out that crime is more tied to economic activity, the ability to find jobs, to have jobs than it is to stop-and-frisk. So, I can't make the lead that says stop-and-frisk is the reason for a lower crime rate, lower murder rate in New York City.

GUILFOYLE: I think they want to tie in top.

BOLLING: There's -- honestly, I got to tell you. You can't, there's no one or two cities that's say, "Look, when they instituted stop-and-frisk, crime rates went down." It did go down in New York but it wasn't because of that. It was because the city got stronger.

GUILFOYLE: But how can you specifically--

BOLLING: --up the city.

GUILFOYLE: OK. But how can you just parcel that out and not say that it wasn't part of--

BOLLING: Because the high--

GUILFOYLE: --overall picture--

BOLLING: --the most dangerous cities in the country have the highest crime.

GUILFOYLE: No, but I'm talking about for New York City. I think it's part of the model that worked here in addition to the fact--

BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: I can tell you that the 4.4 million people who were stopped-and-frisked the last 10 years, a minuscule number were arrested, a minuscule. And there was nothing about very few of them had guns or anything like else like that.

So, at 4.4 million and you get a tiny number of people who get arrested. I mean it doesn't -- it's logical. You need to look at it. It is stepping on the fourth amendment, 4.4 million and you don't stop any crime.

GUILFOYLE: I'm sorry Bob it's not stepping on the first amendment because the Supreme Court disagrees with you. It is legal. It is constitutional and it is not--

BECKEL: For all you people to shake your portion stop-and-frisk show us where it's brought crime down. Specifically.

GUILFOYLE: In that a very--

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: This is exactly like the job-saved argument. When President Obama said, "Well, we're going to show you how many jobs we saved," and it's actually -- you can't actually show job saved. You can't show the number of crimes deterred. There are three important words out of this test -- of the debate yesterday. Integral, behavior, and deterrent. Integral meaning that it is part of policing. Behavior meaning that it's not a ratio profiling. It is behavior and then also a third thing is deterrent.

I got to say I lived in Washington DC compared in New York City but I would much rather be in New York City. It's a much--


PERINO: --safer place than DC.

BECKEL: What is integral?

PERINO: Integral?

BECKEL: Is that like an--

PERINO: Are you kidding me?

BECKEL: No, I don't want--

PERINO: Integral meaning it's like when baking the cake, you have to have it.

BECKEL: Oh, OK. I really I didn't ask.

PERINO: Remind me not to partner with you in scrabble.

BRIAN KILMEADE, GUEST CO-HOST: Right. Absolutely. Kimberly you know we're going stay with you.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, Brian--

KILMEADE: Let's be honest.

GUILFOYLE: --I gave you like--

KILMEADE: When was the last time you played scrabble?

GUILFOYLE: I thought it was you. This weekend.

KILMEADE: Here's the deal. You did, really?




KILMEADE: What's going on with you?

GUILFOYLE: No power.

KILMEADE: All right, first off. The reason why New York works and the other cities don't is because New York is better at it. They're not profiling nationality. They're no profiling colored skin. They're doing behavior.

And what they're doing is when you only have -- when you stop 5 million people and you only have 10 percent resulting in arresting, I say, good job. You know why? Because we're just saying is you're also deterring a lot of people from working out with a peace because it could get stopped. They could -- they'd say, "I'm not going to go into that building. I might going to caught," because I don't like the behavior that leading up to that. And the NYPD will get in your face and just say, "Excuse me, can I talk to you for a second?" They will talk and they will search and would just to sit real quick.

Rudy Giuliani got us on her way. Unbelievable progress, I witnessed it, 42nd Street looked totally different. You walk around, there was not even any litter. People fear Bloomberg would take over and would all come back. The graffiti and everything was impossible to stop. I'll give everything to Mayor Giuliani. But what Mayor Bloomberg did is when he came to law enforcement, he kept it on the down with slope (ph), right? And when you look at those areas, they're not positive areas.

BECKEL: Brian, Brian, Brian, Brian, wait a minute. You have to - before you could say that defectively. I get back to the point of the people who were arrested. Virtually, none of them had guns. Virtually none of them were - had any wrong records and most of them walked away.

KILMEADE: I heard the complaints.

BOLLING: Can I speak out something out Brian.

KILMEADE: The salutations for their effort.

BECKEL: You have to have - you have the unreasonable doubt.

KILMEADE: And they're better than Chicago.


BOLLING: NYPD, they don't do it in Oakland and they don't do it Chicago.

PERINO: That's right.

GUILFOYLE: They should.

BOLLING: They should. But that's not where the highest crime is. The highest crime across the country is where the poverty rates are the highest. Flint, Michigan 41 percent, Detroit 41 percent, Oakland 27 percent, Memphis 20 - that's where the highest between violent crimes and poverty rates--

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely you're.

PERINO: That's not the point.

BOLLING: Let me give you a good example.

PERINO: That's not the police would want.

BOLLING: New York and New Jersey has stop-and-frisk. They have a 33 percent per 100,000 - 33 per 100,000 murder rate.


BOLLING: The highest in the country and they have stop-and-frisk a very transparent--

PERINO: I don't like it.

GUILFOYLE: It's determinative.

PERINO: I don't think this is.

BOLLING: Jobs? Poverty?

PERINO: No. Obviously I think jobs and poverty are key to everybody's success and rises. I'm just saying it's -- that's not the police department's job. And I also don't think that it's determitive just to take numbers like that. Like Bob's has been saying, "Well they didn't have any - they weren't arrested." Well how do you know how many crimes they didn't commit because they were deterred from the--


KILMEADE: Some of the highest.

PERINO: I would rather trust Ray Kelly and Mayor Bloomberg to this than anybody else who is not in law enforcement.

GUILFOYLE: 'Cause they know.

PERINO: Who maybe have been a victim of a crime.

BECKEL: Who are you referring to?


PERINO: Lots of people.


KILMEADE: I'm serious. Dead serious to do that research not depending on other people's flow charts and pie charts, awesome. But this is where I like to add to this whole thing. When you talk about race and nationality playing a role in where they do stop-and-frisk. They go with it just it so happens that in many of those areas is where there's more crime happened.

BECKEL: Was not an argument.

KILMEADE: Which is where they go?

BECKEL: We're not arguing this.

KILMEADE: So with economic is definitely tied into criminal behavior.

GUILFOYLE: Part of the puzzle.

BECKEL: Brian. Brian.

KILMEADE: I understand that. So that's why there's a focus. So throw us the race aspect which we saw--


BECKEL: It says the police department says you're supposed to have reasonable suspicion. Do you think there was 4.4 million--

KILMEADE: Behavior.

BECKEL: Reasonable suspicions?

KILMEADE: Yes, yes.


BECKEL: Oh come on.


BOLLING: In this aspect and I'm going to differ with Bob. I do think it's constitutional. I don't think the police are doing anything wrong by doing it. I'm simply saying when you look for cause - causal effect - the reasons behind murder rates, violent crime rates, rapes, et cetera. It's more tied to economic availability - the ability to find--

GUILFOYLE: But it is not just that.

BOLLING: Then it is stop-and-frisk.

GUILFOYLE: It's not just job. There's bad people out there. There's criminals. They don't want to work any plane (ph).


BOLLING: We're not saying anything different.

GUILFOYLE: Or gang members et cetera. This is a vital law enforcement tool and you'll see what happens if this gets side aside.

BOLLING: We need to give Giuliani credit for cleaning up New York city. Not because he continued a policy of stop-and-frisk which in place prior to Giuliani. And the crime was real high.

BECKEL: And I think he deserves a credit for this--



KILMEADE: Under Rudy Giuliani's leadership and it was continued and carried to the--


BECKEL: It was before that.

KILMEADE: And it was continued with Ray Kelly in a level that nobody has every seen before--

BECKEL: It was done before Giuliani came--

GUILFOYLE: And also, if you guys are worried about racial profiling and-

BECKEL: I'm not. It's--

GUILFOYLE: Hold on. Bloomberg signed a law in 2004 banning that. There are safeguards in place. The Supreme Court said it's legal. It's not a violation of the constitution. It works.


GUILFOYLE: It's an effective law--


GUILFOYLE: Enforcement tool.


GUILFOYLE: And it is. It does operate as a deterrent. When you have high volume of police officers on the street.

GUILFOYLE: And you know, you're going to get a pass done, you are going to take flight.

BECKEL: Do you believe honestly?

GUILFOYLE: Why would you even care, Bob?

BECKEL: Honestly there's 4.4 million people are a little suspicious.

PERINO: Oh my gosh.

GUILFOYLE: Let me tell you something. Why are we doing such a good job with terror in New York City? Why we've been able to prevent the terror attacks here?

BECKEL: How do you know?

GUILFOYLE: Because we have proactive--

GUILFOYLE: And we have a strong presence in New York City of cops with boots on the ground to make sure that they know--

BOLLING: That's the answer though.

GUILFOYLE: We're here and we're watching and we're paying attention.

BOLLING: And that's what Giuliani did. He put boots on the ground in Times Square. He did the whole broken window issue. You know, broken windows don't - aren't exactly--


BOLLING: Just get rid of squeaky guys cleaning up windows.

GUILFOYLE: See something, say something?

BOLLING: But those are the reasons. Those are the reasons why--


BOLLING: (INAUDIBLE) just came back to the city and then people got jobs. In my opinion, I'm not disagreeing with you guys, I'm not saying--

GUILFOYLE: Where are you going to get valuable information as well with stop-and-frisk?

BOLLING: I'm not saying they shouldn't be doing. I'm simply saying, if we want to look at the reasons behind the lower--


BOLLING: Crime rates in cities like New York. We need to think about jobs--

GUILFOYLE: Let me get this on some -- OK. I think governments--

BECKEL: Boots on the ground that got drivers truck his car right in middle of Times Square and had a bomb in it.

KILMEADE: Disturbing, you're absolutely right.


KILMEADE: But I tell you what, it doesn't diminish all the great things they did.

GUILFOYLE: No, it doesn't. That's why people they feel safe and they come here.

BECKEL: I'm sure they have. I'd like to hear that they--

GUILFOYLE: Let me get to something a little bit interesting that might rally you up even more Bob. Let's talk about cameras and cops wearing them. Where they're like RoboCop. Now, let's take a look at this is what Kelly said.


KELLY: The body camera issue opens up certainly more questions than answers. When do you have the cameras on? When do you turn them off? Do you have it on during a domestic dispute? Do you have it on when somebody comes to give you confidential information? All of these issues have to be answered.


GUILFOYLE: So that -- that does present the problem. If you actually think about the practical impact of cops on the street wearing like head cameras or when do you turn it on, when do you turn it off. Defense lawyers (INAUDIBLE) et cetera they're going to say, "It's a violation of the right, let's suppress the evidence, case gets thrown out, you have gang members, murderers et cetera." It's very confusing. I don't know -- I don't see what benefit you get to that.

BECKEL: You really want to live in a country where cops. Think about cops have cameras on their head -- on their hatch that they can take pictures of me?

GUILFOYLE: Bob, I just--

BECKEL: Who the hell do you think they are? Who do they think they are to do that?

GUILFOYLE: Bob, do I need you to give you the miracle here for Christmas? I just said I'm against that.

BECKEL: Oh you did?


BECKEL: Good, thanks.

GUILFOYLE: Thanks for replying, Brian.

KILMEADE: Miracle ears, plural. I would set the data.

PERINO: I'm for equipping the police with anything, any tool that they need to protect us.

PERINO: And I am not for taking them away. I look at all the mayoral candidates in New York City, and what Ray Kelly's point was this is not just going to affect New York City. This is integral to police in all across America.

BECKEL: Now, those are cameras we're talking about.

PERINO: So, I know, but I'm just saying that and then one of the judge's suggestion was it maybe what they -- instead of stopping and frisking there should be more cameras. That was the liberal judge's contention by. That's what she suggested.


PERINO: Enjoy your experiment, folks. I'm going to go live some place else, right? Have a nice experiment right here New York City, enjoy yourselves and data crime goes way up.

GUILFOYLE: Data is pointing out the hypocrisy of it and the inconsistency intellectually of that kind of argument from the judge. At one hand, she go, "Who knows stop-and-frisk, ooh, that's bad." Like this like, "Oh, more cameras, more cameras."


BOLLING: Stop-and-frisk shouldn't go away. She simply said "You really have train police officers prior to tip the stop-and-frisk.

GUILFOYLE: She said civil rights activists, Bolling.

BECKEL: Well, so what?

GUILFOYLE: That's her piece.


BOLLING: Listen, I called her not to discuss last week's and I apologize. And I think she's in line with -- I mean I -- listen--


BOLLING: You said modify makes you (INAUDIBLE)

BECKEL: The recent thing is for all this stuff, she showed the wild, wild

west. That's life.


GUILFOYLE: The (INAUDIBLE) of underground of whether to. I mean, come on?

KILMEADE: But here's the thing about the cameras. The cop say that -- so the LAPD, I saw some of the columns from some of the cops who said, "I can't like having a camera because I was accused of police brutality and it was good to play it back." But a lot of the NYPD says "You got to be kidding me?" They don't want to part of it because it doesn't give the whole picture of what they're experiencing actually on the street. And if I (INAUDIBLE) domestic disputable barging into the house, you have to all of the sudden make sense the camera that's on your chest.


KILMEADE: And the ear piece--

BECKEL: You don't want the camera with you allows, we're just saying that the guy was used a broom when he gets to precinct. What was his name?

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my gosh.

PERINO: Oh my--

PERINO: You know what Bob--

GUILFOYLE: Now like, move on. The A Block was so good until moment ago. I got Beckled.

Content and Programming Copyright 2013 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2013 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.