Racial Profiling
When an ACLU poster calims that Martin Luther King Jr., one of the nation's most influencial leaders for social change and civil liberty, would be "75 times more likely to be stopped by the police when driving than" Charles Manson, simply because he is black, it draws attention to the issue of racial profiling in the United States.
While the precise definition of racial profiling may be contested, basically it is the use of race as the basis for suspicion of criminal activity. Some say it is a serious concern, others that it doesn't happen, and still others feel it is necessary in today's world. Read the essays from your Bedford Reader and the links below, then discuss the topic with your classmates. You may also wish to revisit Brent Staples's essay "Black Men and Public Space" and consider whether or not it exhibited racial profiling or only general stereotyping.
Adnan R. Kahn: “Close Encounters with US Immigration” page 559 in your Bedford Reader
Citation: (Kahn #)
Linda Chavez: “Everything Isn’t Racial Profiling” page 563 in your Bedford Reader
Citation: (Chavez #)
"The Myth of Racial Profiling" by Heather Mac Donald
Citation: (Mac Donald)
"Racial Profiling" by Amnesty International USA
Citation: ("Racial")
Remember, you are to cite the sources in the text of your argument, not at the end of your post. That is why you were given the parenthetical citation information.
While the precise definition of racial profiling may be contested, basically it is the use of race as the basis for suspicion of criminal activity. Some say it is a serious concern, others that it doesn't happen, and still others feel it is necessary in today's world. Read the essays from your Bedford Reader and the links below, then discuss the topic with your classmates. You may also wish to revisit Brent Staples's essay "Black Men and Public Space" and consider whether or not it exhibited racial profiling or only general stereotyping.
Adnan R. Kahn: “Close Encounters with US Immigration” page 559 in your Bedford Reader
Citation: (Kahn #)
Linda Chavez: “Everything Isn’t Racial Profiling” page 563 in your Bedford Reader
Citation: (Chavez #)
"The Myth of Racial Profiling" by Heather Mac Donald
Citation: (Mac Donald)
"Racial Profiling" by Amnesty International USA
Citation: ("Racial")
Remember, you are to cite the sources in the text of your argument, not at the end of your post. That is why you were given the parenthetical citation information.
posted by Mr. Webb | Monday, October 13, 2008
59 Comments:
Mac Donald boldly challenges the popular conception about racial profiling. Before reading this essay, I admit even I was squarely against any racial profiling, but her arguments make one think. According to Mac Donald, “Blacks make up over 60 percent of arrests in New Jersey for drugs and weapons, though they are 13.5 percent of the population.” This is a shocking fact that undermines any claim about unfair minority targeting. Nor can one dismiss it as simply harassment because an arrest isn’t merely a stop; it’s actually “act of depriving a person of his or her liberty” pending bail and trial (Wikipedia). Although some suspects don’t go to jail, but receive a notice to appear in court, this is a serious step that wouldn’t be made without evidence, just for the fun of harassment. Neither are these arrests dismissed for the lack of evidence, since “roughly 60 percent of drug offenders in state prison are black,” meaning that a jury of their peers has convicted them on the charges of the arrest. One can claim that police officers are racist, but what about juries? They are picked at random from the general population, and represent general population . . . so is everyone racist?
It is also difficult to argue that police target minority neighborhoods for no reason. Police go where the crime is greatest—as it tends to be in minority neighborhoods. Poorer districts are typically occupied by immigrants who can not gain social status in this country precisely because they are immigrants. So they would turn to crime, wouldn’t they? This is definitely the public perception, which makes racial profiling difficult to prove because of the public outcry against immigration. According to MacDonald’s data, “predominant wholesale traffickers are Colombian, followed by Dominicans, Chinese, West African/Nigerian, Pakistani, Hispanic and Indian. Mid-levels are dominated by Dominicans, Colombians, Puerto Ricans, African-Americans and Nigerians." The most common racial minority in this is Hispanic. Hispanic immigration—mostly illegal, though some people see no difference—is a huge issue in the public mind. People are against it. And yet, if these immigrants come to America without breaking any laws and simply work honestly, then what’s with the fuss? The most often quoted reason for dislike of immigration is increase in crime rate and drug trafficking that they bring to America. And yet, when police actually go into these neighborhoods “responding to heartfelt demands for increased police presence” they get burned for being racist. So, what now? Stop, and watch crime grow. Then get burned for ignoring it?
It is clear to me that racial profiling accusations and half-done “reports” only interfere with police work and respond more to a public myth than an actual problem.
"Arrest." Wikipedia. 2008. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 16 Oct 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrest.
(Mac Donald)
Although Ugla makes a good point when she brings up the fact that 60percent of all arrests in New Jersey are arrests of black men and women for drug related issues. But one has to also consider the state. New Jersey is a mostly black population for instance according to New Jersey Profile, 53 percent of Newark, one of New Jersey's bigger cities has over half of the population being black. If 53 percent of Newark is black and 60 percent of New Jersey's crime is done by blacks it is only in select cities that the crime rate is high. It is unfair to categorize all of New Jersey's blacks into the crime committing category when most blacks are only in a few cities. Also, Denver has 11 percent of it's population being black and only 15 percent of the crimes here are committed by blacks. It is unfair to group races into categories under false information.
When racial profiling really becomes an issue is in the government. Some judges and cops allow their opinions to be swayed by a person's race. An example of this is the O.J. Simpson case. His judges didn't want the American eye to veiw them as racial profilers so they ruled that O.J. was not guilty. They ruled this even though there was significant evidence to prove him guilty. The judges decided to pretend that the evidence was tainted in order to legitamatly consider him not guilty. Racial profiling becomes a huge problem when the judges in the supreme court take part in it and let it make the decisions instead of them. It is unjustafiable.
Government Documents, "Colorado White Percentage." Colorado Profile. January 12, 2006. 20 Oct 2008
Although I do believe racial profiling can become a little harsh, I think we need to look at it with more of a global perspective. Americans are probably looked down upon because some of us do a double take when we see someone that looks Middle-Eastern walking through the airport or even just down the street. But, if there was an American that made a terrorist attack on a country in the Middle-East, I’m sure the people there would look down upon Americans. This is more stereotyping than racial profiling. But if an American was walking down the street or through an airport in Hiroshima after the A-bomb was dropped, it probably wouldn’t be uncommon to receive a dirty look or be questioned as to why they were there. Stereotyping may be a bad thing, but it is going to happen no matter what. Americans stereotype other nationalities, but need to accept that other we are also being stereotyped. And it’s not just based on nationality; people are stereotyped based on practically anything. People stereotype by class, race, religion, hair color, the clothes they wear, the car they drive, or whatever. We even stereotype kids at Chatfield and Dakota and other high schools. Stereotyping is going to happen and that’s just something we have to deal with.
I do understand the frustration, having traveled and been in different airports and been stopped in security for a random search. I don’t think I “look” like a terrorist, but it’s not only certain races that are stopped in airports and searched and questioned. Almost everyone can attest to seeing someone that they didn’t think “looked like a terrorist” being searched at random in an airport. Personally, if I was stopped in a country that racially profiled or stereotyped whites and searched or questioned more than the citizens, I would get a little frustrated but I would understand why it was happening. I agree with Chavez when she says, “Sure it's unpleasant to be a suspect when you're innocent. But it's worse to overlook terrorists because we ignored their pertinent characteristics”. It is sad that we have to use increased security and can’t just be trusting of everyone, but things have happened that make this security necessary. And it really wouldn’t be that much of a pain if people just complied with it and understood it’s not them personally that is being discriminated against.
What I’m wondering is, the government has all these things that tell citizens to report any suspicious activity, so how much of racial profiling is just random police officers picking out certain races to question, and how much is actually citizens reporting someone as suspicious? The article “The Myth of Racial Profiling” states that “since the advent of video cameras in patrol cars, installed in the wake of the racial profiling controversy, most charges of police racism, testified to under oath, have been disproved as lies” (Mac Donald). The article is mostly talking about patrol officers on highways, but maybe this is true for all officers. The police can’t be choosing just certain people to discriminate against at random, there has to be something behind the situation. The police are supposed to investigate situations that are reported as suspicious, so is it really the police that are using racial profiling or citizens that are discriminating and reporting it?
To comment on Courtney's last question, it is not people discriminating and reporting crimes. Mac Donald, while describing cops and racial profiling stated, "Sure, the driver committed an infraction, but the reason the trooper chose to stop him, rather than the speeder next to him, was his race". Mac Donald discusses cops pulling people over and searching them because of their race. Although, there can be no direct evidence that proves that was what the trooper was thinking at the time, even though it may look like it. With each circumstance, the cop could have a very good reason to pull over the minority.
Ashley L W brought up a great point when she said, "When racial profiling really becomes an issue is in the government". Then she used the O.J. Simpson case as an example. The jury did not want to be racist, so they found him not guilty. However, it is more likely that he got off because of his fame then his race. But, racial profiling still does come up in courtrooms. Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, a black boxer in the 60s, was convicted of three murders he did not commit by two different juries, who happened to be all white. He later proved he did not commit the crimes and was freed because the judge ruled he was convicted because of racism. He was in jail for 20 years before someone realized he was being discriminated against.
The 60s had more racism than the present time. Today's generation has to be punished for the past generations racial profiling. So far, people have been talking about racial profiling against minorities and how stereotyping blacks based on past events and statistics showing their crime rates is wrong. Majorities as well as minorities are being racially profiled. Because of slavery and the past of white America, white people today are considered to be racists. White people have to really watch what they say and how they come off to minorities, or they will be considered a racist. Colleges let in less qualified applicants over the more qualified because the less happens to be a minority and they want more diversity at their school. Look at the Allan Bakke case in 1978 for proof. He applied to the University of California but did not get in because many spots were reserved with minorities even though Bakke had a higher GPA and test scores than them. The moral of the story is that everyone is racial profiled, even majorities. It happens everywhere and cannot be stopped. Stereotyping and racial profiling is wrong but natural to people, and will continue happening because people cannot help noticing certain trends and traits involving certain races of people.
Heather Mac Donald believes that racial profiling does not exist, but Amnesty International USA’s Five Facts of racial profiling, not only proves that it exists, but also, that it actually makes us less safe.
Heather Mac Donald says that if racial profiling is stopped, than this movement will “obliterate the crime-fighting gains of the last decade.” Statistics, however, directly contradict this. In 2003, a white college student was able to smuggle harmful equipment past airport security because he didn’t “fit the profile” (“Racial”). If the police had been paying attention to suspicious behavior rather than “suspicious” races, nationalities, etc, than this white male would not have been able to get past security with dangerous equipment.
“The racial profiling debate focuses primarily on highway stops. The police are pulling over a disproportionate number of minority drivers for traffic offenses, goes the argument, in order to look for drugs” (Mac Donald.) Yet, racial profiling has proven a failure when it comes to using it on the war on drugs. A survey in New Jersey “found that although people of color were searched more frequently, state troopers found drugs in vehicles driven by whites 25% of the time, by African Americans 13%, and by Latinos 5%” (“Racial”.)
The comments from Olga S, Will J, Ashley L, and Courtney W suggest that racial profiling does not exist. I must disagree. It is likely, because the majority of my fellow bloggers are white, that racial profiling has not been experienced. I, however have experienced it. A friend and I were pulled in front of the house of a friend. Our black friend and his two black brothers came out and sat in the car with us. The five of us, all minorities, were talking and listening to quiet music. About ten minutes after we had arrived, a police car pulled up behind us. The officer told us he had received a call that we were driving up and down the street “yelling obscenities” at pedestrians. All of us were outraged because we had been doing no such thing, but we were all compliant and respectful. Once we were permitted to leave, a back-up police car pulled up and an officer got out to converse with the officer who had talked to us. The officers stayed for another half an hour to watch the house and make sure no illegal behavior was exhibited.
My story backs up what Amnesty International USA proves: racial profiling encourages hate and undermines national unity and undermines enforcement efforts. The person who made the phone call, if there was even a phone call made, obviously had hate towards the five of us in the car simply because we were minority. If racial profiling did not exist, then most would civilians would not make assumptions based on race either. Also, because the police stayed to make sure no trouble would arise, it is possible that a theft or murder happened that could have been avoided if only the police had not used racial profiling.
There have been situations where perpetrators have gotten away simply because of racial profiling, like the sniper investigation of D.C. (“Racial.”)
This is quite a controversial topic, but I stand my ground that racial profiling exists and is wrong.
Racial profiling is a world wide problem. “Racial profiling has reportedly undermined important terrorist investigations in the U.S., including the Oklahoma City bombings in which the two white male assailants were able to flee while officers reportedly operated on the theory that the act had been committed by "Arab terrorists." (Racial). Last year I studied the Oklahoma City bombings. I had always wondered why the terrorist had so much time to get away. During my research my mind never once crossed the idea of racial profiling. But in this quote from “Racial” it is now clear that because in the past terrorist attacks most had been committed by “Arab terrorists” investigators assume and jump to conclusions before learning the real truth.
As my peers have commented in their posts, they have been showing that they believe that racial profiling does not exist anymore, but they know it did in the past. I feel as though if you are the minority race, you might get a better outlook on issues that occur.
I am going to comment further on Jennifer m w’s incident that occurred to her this summer. I was also involved during this I just happened to be the driver and owner of the car. We weren’t doing anything wrong. We were listening to music with the windows down but it was before dark and the music was not loud. Yes there is a law that you cannot listen to music loud during certain hours of the night, but it was still day time. Two of the boys earlier were dancing in the street to the music and all of us were laughing and having a good time. About ten minutes later a cop pulls up behind us. He comes to my window and says, “I have received a complaint that you have been driving up and down the street yelling obscenities at pedestrians.” I immediately told the cop that nothing was going on. And Jenni told the cop the same thing. He then asked for my license and also for my home phone number. He needed the number incase the same complaint was received again. The others in the car had explained to the officer that we had been parked in the same spot for about a half an hour. But he continued to say, “Well I received a complaint.” The officer was ready to accuse us for doing nothing wrong. Then another cop car pulled up for “assistance.” We were allowed to go, but the officers waited outside my friends house for about a half an hour after we left probably to make sure we didn’t come back. It has happened to me and this shows that racial profiling still continues.
Olga and Ashley both talked about New Jersey and the percentage of Blacks in prison there. But what about the US as a whole. In "Black America's Prison Complex" by Amy Williams(my own source), she states, "While Blacks represent 12.7 percent of the US population, they make up 48 percent of the judicial system." So if this is the case, then that means the rest are a mixture of Whites and Hispanics and what ever other races you can think of, which makes Blacks the majority of crime doers in America. Now, most people in America don't know the exact percentages, but they know that they make up the majority. So, it's not wrong to be looking at a person who is Black and maybe making some kind of racial profile or stereotype on them. It's just the facts. Now I am not racist and I know there are a lot of nice and great African-Americans out there, but if your walking home late at night like the woman in Brent Staple's essay and you happen to see a man following you and you quicken your pace a little bit, can you really blame her? Or from the cops perspective, because of statistics you are just going to generally be more suspicious of the majority race of crime rate which just so happens to be at this time Blacks. It's sad and I wish it wasn't this way, honestly, because there are and have been a lot of Black people who have suffered racial profiling because of all the others of the race have done. They pay for others mistakes. It is a harsh reality but thats life.
I don't mean to just pick on Blacks it happens with all races including whites. Think, if you were to see a guy any guy in a cowboy hat and boots and spitting you would probably call that person a redneck or a hick. Or if you saw a person walking around in the town of Boulder you would call them a hippie, I know I would. But the truth of the matter is we all make assumptions about people different than us, it's in out blood. We can't help it. We go by what we know and what we see everyday and if we see a Black family getting killed in a drive by in the ghetto on t.v, than we will always, atleast subconsciously, keep that in out heads and use that on our assumptions of people. The same goes for seeing terrorists blow up our soldiers or our buildings. I mean there is a reason a stereotype becomes a stereotype and you can't argue with that. But even with that I don't like to call it racial profiling, I like to think of it more as racial awareness. You are aware of certain races and the how you have seen them percieved and in turn how you percieve them and thats your choice to make, but still always give someone the benefit of the doubt. This has been Stephen K W saying goodnight and good luck.
Let me clarify something as objectively as I can--for the sake of logic. Stephen, you claim that because Blacks make up 48% of those in the judicial system that they are guilty of the majority of the crimes. However, part of what is at the heart of the topic is the profiling that arrests a greater number of one race than another unjustly. It may come down to a "which came first--chicken or egg" type debate, but are 48% of Blacks in the judicial system because they commited a majority of the crimes, or are 48% of Blacks in the judicial system because they have been perceived as crime doers and are arrested disproportionately? I do not think the answer is overly clear, which is what makes this an interesting topic to debate.
In Stephen’s post he says that “48 percent of the judicial system” consists of blacks(Williams). He also states that racial profiling or “racial awareness” is ok because of this percentage. Such a high number makes the black race convictable of questionable behavior, which makes stereotyping ok because the stereotype is true. I can’t agree with him more on that subject. If almost half of the U.S.’s inmates are black then the black race as a whole must be doing some pretty bad stuff to get locked up. And if they are doing things bad enough to be put in jail then I, as a U.S. citizen, have the right to be afraid of them and to racially profile them. I am not trying to say that all blacks are bad because they are not, it’s just the select few that maybe have at one time made bad decisions or are currently making bad decisions. But, Mr. Webb makes a good point. If 48 percent of blacks in the judicial system have been put there unjustly then it’s very unfair for us to stereotype them for something we did to them. But why is racial profiling limited to only blacks and what whites do to them? I for one have felt stereotyped by blacks and other races before, and I think if the roles were reversed and whites were the ones being falsely accused of doing crimes and we were the ones in jail, things would be just the same as they are now. Nothing would ever change. Because people are programmed to be the same way, skin color does not matter, we are all the same on the inside. It’s what the person has done or the crime they have committed that makes them questionable or not. And if the blacks in our prisons right now are in there because of false accusations on our part then they must have been in a very questionable situation to begin with because our government officials could not get away with lying about something the prisoner did if some of it was not true and there was no evidence to prove it, the American public would know about it.
Williams, Amy. "Amnesty International USA." Racial Profiling. 1 Nov. 2008 www.amnestyusa.org/us-human-rights/racial-profiling/page.do?id=1106650>.
In Mr. Webb’s short excerpt, he remarks on how the African- Americans included in the 48% Stephen K brought up could have been arrested unjustly because there was not any evidence against them. This brings up a good point. While crimes are committed by minorities and majorities all the time, many of the people actually convicted were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that does not make racial profiling OK. There is to much racial bias in the world to excuse anymore of it. To me it is like saying just because I am a white girl living in the middle of suburbia, I am a spoiled little princess. (No offense to anyone at all by the way, just trying to think of a stereotype!) Every person is unique and different, and should be judged on their actions, not the color of their skin. Even then, the actions of one person should not affect the judgment placed upon another.
There are several types of racial profiling that exist today. The blog has mentioned mostly ones that have a basis in crime, dealing with law enforcement and safety. There is another thing that I think ties into this really well, though not necessarily in the crime related area, and that is Amendment 46; Discrimination and Preferential Treatment by Governments. We can debate this or not, but I think it just adds fuel to the fire so to speak because racism is in every part of life with some people. Amendment 46 is going to be voted on to " Prohibit Colorado governments from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, or public contracting. (Colorado Blue Book)" This brings up the question of racial profiling in everyday life. Everything from scholarship choices, to filling up a minority number in a business. Racial profiling exists today.
Someone might research the airport policies in Israel (I think it is Tel Aviv ariport). I believe they use profiling outright--and some rather outrageous cases have resulted--but they have one of the safest airports in the world.
Worth looking into, anyway.
Following Webb’s suggestion to research this topic, I was thoroughly fascinated by a certain article regarding racial profiling at Tel Aviv airport. (Gosh, don’t you love Google?) In the article “Ethnic Profiling at Tel Aviv Airport” a man tells of a black man who was traveling with the most prominent and well-known dance company of the U.S. who was stopped and asked to perform twice just to prove that he has traveling with the dance company! Simply because his name was Abdur-Rahim Jackson, given to him by his Muslim father, he was humiliated and suggested to him that he change his name.
Moreover, because of the ongoing battle between Jews and Arabs, Arabs are given a sticker with number six on it; Jews with the number one or two. A six “leads to the most thorough and degrading check of luggage and person.” Whereas a one or a two “means you get whisked through security with just an x-ray scan of your luggage.” That is truly outright racial profiling. But it is indeed one of the safest airports. However, humiliating a performer by making him dance, not once, but twice, is unacceptable. If an airport is humiliating and degrading its customers then why should it matter how safe it is? Is it truly to be better safe than sorry?
Furthermore, I would like to comment on Stephen and Ashley’s comments. Both of my peers have indeed confused racial profiling and stereotyping. There is no doubt that stereotyping is ever going to go away. This is simply because the government can not mandate that no one can stereotype; it is beyond our government’s control. However, racial profiling is done by the law, at least in the case that our blog is on. Therefore, it should be a simple, “You just can’t do that,” to law enforcement officers. All racial profiling does is cast away everything that our American people have worked so hard for. We now have a black president of the United States! We came over in chains, and we now have a black president and first lady. This country has come far, but only with the help of each individual to refuse to stereotype, specifically to profile based on race.
I forgot to cite my source.
Barghouti, Omar
"Ethnic Profiling at Tel-Aviv Airport"
Sep 14, 2008
< http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10192 >
Jennifer M stated, “If an airport is humiliating and degrading its customers then why should it matter how safe it is? Is it truly to be better safe than sorry?” A person would want to be safe when traveling, but I think respect overrules the safety factor. Since the terrorist atttacks on 9/11, “Muslims are increasingly under suspicion” (Khan 558). They are subject to this just because the terrorists were Muslim, so the whole ethnicity is under suspicion now. Airports are a prime example of this because they control who comes into the country. It isn’t right and it most certainly is not necessary to suspect a person of committing a crime because of their race.
In Adnan R. Kahn’s essay “Close Encounters with the US Immigration” he tells of his personal experience with racial profiling in an airport. Khan is hauled off to a room full of minorities just because he is from Pakistan; they completely overlook his Canadian citizenship. On page 560 he says, “I’d been made to feel . . . as if I were guilty of some heinous crime.” Khan was innocent; however, because of his race he was put under suspicion. This is an outright form of racial profiling, and after being released he asks, “Had America’s national interest really been served?” (560). If they find nothing, is racial profiling really necessary?
I agree with Jennifer M’s statement that our peers “have indeed confused racial profiling and stereotyping.” Racial profiling is a larger issue than stereotyping because it is implies illegal activity. Stereotyping does not usually classify an entire race, instead it focuses on smaller groups, for example blacks living in bad neighborhoods; it does not include the entire black race, just the ones in bad neighboorhoods. Racial profiling does include the entire African-American ethnicity, which makes it a broader problem.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Now what I'm about to say might step on some toes, but you cannot argue with statistics. Racial profiling exists, and it exists for a reason. Does that mean I believe it to be just? No. Right? Of course not. But I most certainly am not going to say that I haven't committed it, and I definitely wont say that all of my judgments have been correct, but I will say that there are numbers, facts, and loads of compiled data that can be used to argue the opposite. I like to think of racial profiling in terms of math since there is little room for error in the world of arithmetic. Based on extremely recent polls from a mere seven years ago, the current rates of first incarceration conclude that 32% of black males will enter State or Federal prison during their lifetime and so will 17% of Hispanic males. So, with only those two minorities combined, they account for nearly 50% of prisoners. Almost one half of the Hispanic and Black male population will end up in our judicial system. And when you compare their 49% predicted entry rate to the assumed 5.9% of white males, racial profiling is born and-- as some might venture to say-- justified. The entry rate into a prison for blacks is 18.9% higher than that for whites, and the same for Hispanics is 10% higher. Of course I realize that these are simply numbers and they're not people. Plus, I don't have any entertaining stories to tell, and I can't say that I have been a victim of racial profiling based on my outer appearances, but I will confidently say this: racial profiling is not only skin deep.
Yes skin may play a important role on first impressions, or act as "probable cause" for a search warrant, but racial profiling goes further than that. As most of you know, I'm white. Some might even say pale, although I prefer the term "fair." However, you may also know that my last name is Martinez-- by blood and not law. Hispanic. I too am a statistic. And according to the added statistics against me, I'm not supposed to have a successful marriage (since my parents are divorced), contain an 11.8% chance of doing time (Hispanic female), I'm only predicted to graduate High School with a C-average (2.0), and I have a 50-50 chance of finishing college, but a 60% chance of getting scholarships if I check the box on applications marked "Hispanic/Mexican". Go me. So, I too realize that statistics are not all there is to a person since I highly disagree with nearly all (scholarships are nice) of the numbers against myself. But, I am also able to see that there are very few exceptions to statistics.
For example, I am not the only Hispanic female that I know, or on this planet. And I am not nearly stupid enough to assume that they're all going to turn out just fine. So, I am both one who has been racially profiled, and one who has committed it. A victim can also be a criminal. In fact, I am a firm believer that anyone who claims to have never racially profiled someone is a hypocrite, and I will refuse to eat my words if someone says otherwise. Statistics-- which are facts-- lead to stereotypes,and although stereotyping and racial profiling are not identical, racial profiling comes from stereotypes. White men are certainly capable of robbing banks, but black men are the ones most commonly found in the act. It's just the way the numbers are. It's simple really. It's elementary.
Again, I'm not saying that racial profiling is right, I'm simply saying that statistically, it exists with reason-- not good reason, but reason nonetheless.
My statistics came from the Bureau of Justice Statistics:
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/
Yes, statistics do prove racial profiling exists, but the real question is, should we try to stop it? The politically correct answer would be yes; as Americans it is our duty to be as fair and as just as we possibly can be. But as human beings we fail miserably at such a task. As Jennifer M W states, we “have indeed confused racial profiling and stereotyping,” but at the heart of it, stereotyping is the basis of racial profiling. Human brains need organization; without perfect little groups we go insane. That is why we stereotype and that is why racial profiling occurs. I will not blame the policeman, whos job it is to keep the community safe, of using their predefined knowledge to be a little cautious at times. I will not blame the court that finds “32% of black males will enter State or Federal prison during their lifetime”(Savannah M W) because they are as just as they possibly can be. I will blame the people who are stupid enough to get themselves into the situations that envoke such racial profiling. If someone is carefully driving at a decent hour of the day, they are much less likely to be pulled over, whatever color their skin is. I truly believe that our country (which is the primary place racial profiling occurs according to “Racial”) is as fair as the human race can be. We have our faults, but that cannot be helped.
One may think since I am a white female under the age of eighteen, I would be one of the least likely canidates for any type of extra percaution in an airports. Airports were once a definate place to observe racial profiling. Even though Jennifer M W’s example was about Arabs and Jews, (on another note entirely, Jewish people should not be considered a race, it’s a religion) one could use this note with Arabs and Whites, also. One would think in an airport I could “get whisked through security with just an x-ray scan of [my] luggage” (Jennifer M W). Not true. I have been patted down and gun checked on mulitiple occasions. These “random checks” make sure every race is checked and secured, making racial profiling cut down to a minimum. All of the stastics my peers have used are dated further back than these checks have started, which was about a year ago. Therefore, at least in airports, the issue of racial profiling is greatly reduced due to the new techniques airports have begun to use.
This comment has been removed by the author.
There is a tendency in this blog to use the words (or concepts) of stereotyping and racial profiling interchangeably. This seems incorrect, since stereotyping is just the common folks’ prejudice against any group of people, while racial profiling is a law enforcement and crime prevention tool that allows police and other public safety systems to include “racial or ethnic characteristics in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime or an illegal act”—all of this based on statistics and other preexisting information, and used by law enforcement (wikipedia, Racial Profiling). (So, technically, Savannah, I’ve often stereotyped and never, ever racial profiled) So, if you believe that law enforcements unfairly stop innocent blacks or Hispanics—than, yes, it is a form of racial profiling. If you believe that the juries convict minorities unfairly based on their skin color—that’s just prejudice; it has nothing to do with racial profiling. Besides, doesn’t the judge in court have to reject the jury’s ruling if it is unreasonable based on the evidence presented?
Jenny M says that Tel Aviv is “indeed one of the safest airports. However, humiliating . . .its customers then why should it matter how safe it is? Is it truly better to be safe than sorry?” This seems like a rhetoric question that’s just too tempting not to answer. Is it better to be blown to bits 3 kilometers above the Atlantic by an explosive? Or to just go through the additional half hour check? Remember, the authorities have to consider the safety of the passengers as a whole; so, is it better to humiliate one man (he’ll get over it) and ensure the safety of the entire plane, or save one man’s pride and endanger the lives of all other passengers (who won’t get over an explosion in midair)? Isn’t the fact that Tel Aviv is one of the safest airports in the world enough to justify racial profiling at work there? How can one criticize it as useless when it works so well?
Consider, also, the simple issue of man power. In the case of the Oklahoma Bombing, Rachel H is sure that the terrorists had such an easy time getting away because “in the past terrorist attacks most had been committed by “Arab terrorists” investigators assume and jump to conclusions before learning the real truth.” Logic is so easy with hindsight. But back in the moment, what were the investigators to do? Oklahoma City isn’t a bustling metropolis with thousands of police troops to spear; law enforcements just couldn’t stop every single person in the city and take them in for questioning, just because the assailants could have been white or black or Arab or Crimean Mongol. Police had to find some sort of a short cut, a lead, a clue; there is no way to move quickly and explore every possibility at once. Is it not common sense to consider the Arabs first, when previous terrorist acts have been committed by “Arab terrorists”?
And, as for the racial profiling in Tel Aviv, can you say “provoked”? Not only are Arabs the most notorious of terrorists (why does this sound like a compliment?), but Palestine is locked in conflict with Israel. And have you heard the Iranian President’s, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, public statements about wiping Israel off the map? Now, apparently, that was a mistranslation for simply hoping “ its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse” (Wikipedia, Mahmoud). Still, that couldn’t have improved political relations. So, if we are taking sides here on whether Tel Aviv security should use racial profiling to check Muslims, than I’m entirely on security’s side. They have more than enough cause for concern.
"Mahmoud Ahmadinejad." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 2008. Wikipedia Foundation, inc. 8 Nov 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel>.
"Racial Profiling." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 2008. Wikipedia, Foundation Inc. 8 Nov 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_profiling>.
I’m just going to throw a different idea out there. Mac Donald stated, “The racial profiling debate focuses primarily on highway stops,” while the Tel Aviv Airport “[uses] profiling outright” (Mr. Webb). The police and security at the airport use racial profiling to suspect other races of commiting crimes, but what would change if they racially profiled people of their own race? I do not think people are capable of racially profiling their own race because it would feel as if they themselves were under suspicion, and really they would be. If races were reversed in these events black policemen would not use racial profiling and pull over one of their own because he or she was black. I don’t think any race would. Gina H said, “As Americans it is our duty to be as fair and as just as we possibly can be.” Would we be as fair and just against our own races? I don’t think so, but I do think racial profiling may come from this.
Because races will never suspect their own, I believe they compensate for this by profiling others. Although “there are times when it makes sense to include race or national origin in a larger criminal profile,” (Chavez) it would never be their own race; humans are not capable of it because it would be “wrong.” Instead, they focus on the other races of people committing crimes, and deny the fact that their own race is doing so too. This is where the profiling of other races comes in.
Racial profiling is defined as “the consideration of race when developing a profile of suspected criminals; by extension, a form of racism involving police focus on people of certain racial groups when seeking suspected criminals” (dictionary.com). The arguments presented by each article concerning this topic are valid, but personally when I see a definition like this it’s hard to not be dismayed. To point at someone who falls under a certain race and call them a criminal because of that—stereotyping like that just isn’t so simple. The topic of race just isn’t so black and white. People aren’t so easily placed into a category where we can look at the facts about them and there for say what they are with certainty. Sure you can look at any rose bush you come across and say it’s going to have thorns; that’s a fact. People, however, don’t just fall under such factually specific categories. Adan R. Kahn’s article talks of his experience as a “Pakistani Canadian and a Muslim” trying to get into American to complete an assignment as part of his job (Kahn 570). Unfortunetly for Kahn he couldn’t get into America because he fit the description of what many Americans define as a terrorist. This is discrimination based on race, otherwise known as racism. Discrimination is the “treatment or consideration of, of making a distinction in favor of or against, a person of thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit” (dictionary.com). That said racial profiling is based on racism. In MacDonald’s “The Myth of Racial Profiling,” she tries to come across as proving that racial profiling isn’t racist and really doesn’t exist. Truly what she is trying to do is justify racism and racial profiling, and therefore proves it exists. She writes, “Between 1976 and 1994, 64 percent of the homicide victims in drug turf wars were black, according to a Heritage Foundation analysis of FBI data” (Mac Donald). So what now? Say a police man stops a black man as a simple traffic stop; it would also be justified for this police man, a man of justice, to search this black man and his vehicle because according to the analysis above he could have drugs with him. That’s right and that’s just and now that’s part of justice. To me this is wrong because unless this man, or any other man, was acting in a manner that would suggest that he is suspicious, he should not be searched. Why can’t we look at an individual person and let him or her prove their self rather than let their stereotype prove them?
Like others have said, racial profiling does exist. Although racial profiling is wrong sometimes it is necessary. For example at the Mexican border, its obvious that someone Mexican is going to be crossing the border to come to America, not some one who is white. I think this is one of the few times were racial profiling is ok. Michael Cutler, who works with the Center for Immigration Studies, states that “ finding undocumented immigrants is a national-security imperative, since such nets could enmesh potential terrorists.” This is true because how are we going to abolish terrorism if we do not question people who are crossing the border. Sometimes people tend to be a bit too politically correct and are afraid to step on people’s toes. Of course a Hispanic who is crossing the border is more likely to be illegal than a white person who is crossing the border--statistics don’t lie. Cutler also asks, “"How can we be safe when we have millions of people in our country and we don't know their identification or anything about them?" If we want are country to be safe, then why are so many people against searches at the border? An article from the New York Times states, “ A city immigration group, Families for Freedom, plans to ramp up a campaign against the searches.” I do not understand why people are against these searches if they want our country to be safer and have less identity theft, drug smuggling, and less crimes committed by illegal immigrants. Of course, I’m not saying that every Hispanic that crosses the border is doing it illegally because that would not be true.
This is also seen at the airport when Arabs are searched more. Like Olga S has stated “Remember, the authorities have to consider the safety of the passengers as a whole; so, is it better to humiliate one man (he’ll get over it) and ensure the safety of the entire plane, or save one man’s pride and endanger the lives of all other passengers.” It is obvious that it is better to be safe than to be afraid to search someone just because you do not want to be considered a racist and hurt people’s feelings since it causes tension among different races. But most terrorists have been Arabs so it makes sense that airport security would be more suspicious of them than of whites.
Naames, Marlene. Bus, train passengers: Border Patrol racial profiling at times." AM new York [Am New York]July 9, 2008 : C8.
Well, it is obvious to me that our debate is not really so much about if racial profiling exists, or if it is "ok", but more so about what racial profiling is. For example, Gina H. used a limited definition, but our posts have all extended well past said boundaries: we've re-defined racial profiling several times, and that's the way it should be. Even the U.S. Department of Justice says that "When seeking to determine whether allegations of racial profiling are accurate, any analysis concerning the nature and scope of the problem depends on the definition of racial profiling used." Strongly note the last part: "depends on the definition of racial profiling used." Our own law has varying definitions. I've also noted that Olga has politely reminded us that racial profiling is simply a legal term and that we should focus on it as such, but-- I state with confidence-- we can't just sit here and put racial profiling in a box by saying that it only "matters" in judicial situations. Racial profiling happens every single day people, and just because someone isn't being arrested in an airport for being Muslim doesn't mean that my black next door neighbor-- who is five years old-- can't feel just as wronged when he comes home from school crying because of his skin color. Racial profiling affects people on much deeper levels then mere law. It's considered racial profiling when you walk your dog and decide to cross the street so you don't have to pass the Mexican who just got home from work, it is racial profiling when you smell smoke upon sitting next to your Black lab partner and assume it's him only to ignore the fact that it might be his parents, and it is even racial profiling to say that white people hate minorities simply because they are white (yes, whites can be victims too). My point is this, it's ok to argue the political side of racial profiling, but we would be ignorant fools to limit ourselves to such.
Stereotyping has also been noted by me as a point of confusion. To borrow Gina H's idea, the American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition
defines stereotyping as "A generalization, usually exaggerated or oversimplified and often offensive, that is used to describe or distinguish a group." Now call me crazy, but last time I checked racial profiling was a) offensive, b) a generalization, c) exaggerated or oversimplified, and-- just for further emphasis-- d) used to describe or distinguish a group. Well look-y here folks, an almost exact match. People get offended being stereotyped, people get offended-- furious really-- upon being racially profiled. Stereotyping is a generalization that groups similar people with similar characteristics, racial profiling complains of the generalization of race. Stereotyping is considered to be exaggerated, and racial profiling is often exaggerated when someone's complexion leads to a drug search. And last time I checked-- which was about three minutes ago-- stereotyping is used to describe or distinguish a group, which practically makes up the base of racial profiling. So, I can see why we tend to use stereotyping and racial profiling "interchangeably" (Olga). It is because they are easily interchanged: stereotyping is the reason racial profiling even exists. It is at the heart of racial profiling, and--if I may say so-- I can't really see a problem with using the one to describe the other. They are not the same, but they both include one another.
Another point that has struck me as odd was one brought up by Marisa L: races will never suspect their own. And while she makes a decent argument, I must oppose. Races suspect their own all of the time. Why else do gangs exist? This point is fairly absurd. Can one honestly believe that just because I am Hispanic means that I would be astounded to see one of my fellow brethren in a high-speed chase? Think again. It wouldn't surprise me in the least. Marisa also touched on the fact that a cop wouldn't pull someone of his same race over. If you ask me, that's just as bad-- if not worse-- than pulling someone over because they aren't your ethnicity. I've witnessed plenty of white cops with a white suspect, and I've witnessed white cops with a suspect from a minority, and I sleep better at night knowing that the law does this. If a police officer is letting someone "off the hook" because they're brothers of skin, every criminal would be freed because there are cops of every race. And on top of that, there would be gangs or divisions of cops because the white cops would be arresting minorities, and minorities would be arresting whites. Our judicial system would be divided, and that's simply not how America works. We are a united nation, and our police try their best to keep it as such. Minority or not, if you're doing something wrong, you should and will be arrested despite the color of the cop doing it.
A Resource Guide on Racial Profiling Data Collection Systems U.S. Department of Justice Promising Practices and Lessons Learned:
http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/bja/184768.pdf
The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition:
Dictionary.com
If minorities are so against the racial profiling that exists in America, they do not need to stay here. There is nothing forcing minorities to live in America. Part of the reason racial profiling is prominent in America is that there is such a wide variety of races; everyone wants to be part of America. True, racial profiling is unjust, but when you look around even Columbine High School, there is more than one race. How are the police supposed to investigate crimes without offending people? If there is a drug deal that primarily involves black males, why should they question Hispanic females? Or there could even be a crime committed by a white person and maybe other whites that are questioned about it will be offended. Like in the movie “The Godfather” why would the police go after black people if it is blatantly clear that white people are committing the crimes? So if minorities have such a problem being racially profiled, there is no one forcing them to stay here. There are countries where blacks or Hispanics are the majorities and they look at white people suspiciously. There is nothing keeping people in America, so if it’s really that bad, they don’t have to stay. But safety needs to be a priority, especially when law enforcement is involved.
The issues of stereotyping and racial profiling have been brought up throughout the blog. Racial profiling is “discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or on any other particular identity” (“Racial”). Racial profiling is discrimination based on almost anything. Racial profiling is discrimination. Every single human is guilty of discriminating against someone, and police are human. The situation of discrimination is more serious when a crime is committed, but we cannot blame police for being racist and unfairly discriminating when we ourselves do it too. Savannah suggested that “stereotyping is the reason racial profiling even exists” but no one that has ever stereotyped can claim the police as being wrong for using racial profiling. If they are so wrong for doing so, then we are too, so there can be no one at blame for this. The only way anything is going to change is if stereotyping was gone, but that is not just going to happen.
First off, I would like to clarify something from my first post. Jenny M W stated that my post believed that racial profiling does not exist and she also stated that, "it is likely, because the majority of my fellow bloggers are white, that racial profiling has not been experienced". Well saying that I have not experienced racial profiling because I am white is racial profiling. Also I did state that racial profiling does exist and gave an example of black and white people being racially profiled.
Now that that's cleared up I would like to comment on Savannah's post and talk about "what racial profiling is". Definitely, there are stereotypes on certain races and also stats to support them. I believe that minorities are more involved in racial profiling because of the backgrounds in which they come from. Blacks were oppressed greatly over the years and many of them suffer from poverty. Because they come from such backgrounds, they are more likely to be involved in crime, more likely to be found in all those statistics, and be profiled by race. Mike Volpe in "Race and Poverty in America", quoted Bill O'Reilly for saying, "For married blacks, the median income is $50,729. For married whites the median is $60,080. And because the majority of African-Americans live in the South . . . salaries and living costs are lower". Volpe went on to say that there is "a lack of economic opportunity in the African American race". If this race suffers from poverty more than the rest, they are likely to be more involved in crime and be put under such stereotypes and racial profiling that they are criminals. However, many blacks that are successful and that are wealthy suffer from this racial profiling and may be arrested or violated for no other reason because they are black.
Also Savannah brought up an excellent point when she said, when referring to police not pulling over people of the same race, "If you ask me, that's just as bad-- if not worse-- than pulling someone over because they aren't your ethnicity" Racial profiling is a double edged sword. If a cop pulls someone over because their race, it is racial profiling. If a cop does not pull someone over or does not arrest someone because of his or her race, it is also racial profiling. Sometimes people put certain races under stereotypes on accident and races can turn around every injustice against them by saying it was because of his or her race. It can happen automatically without thinking about it because the human mind constantly looks for patterns and traits that form logic out of something they do not understand, like different races.
Volpe, Mike. "Race and Poverty in America." The Provocateur. 21 March 2008. 9 Nov 2008 http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2008/03/race-and-poverty-in-america.html.
No one should be afraid of another person because of the color of their skin, it is simply ignorant, yet for some reason, no one can seem to help it. That is what i simply do not understand. Why is it that our society fears an ethnicity just because there seem to be more crimes committed by that ethnicity, we seem to pin it on that whole race.
Courtney W is right, stereotyping will never go away. People are to afraid of difference and diversity to accept it. Savanah M also marks a good point in that racial profiling is more than just a judicial problem; it happens everywhere. I think citizens in general, not pointing any fingers to anyone though, use racial profiling as a judicial term to cover up their insecurities about the issue. We all know it is wrong to judge people, but we all do it anyway. if the excuse is simply, "well look at these statistics" the moral rong-doing goes away. Savannah brings up cause to debate even more. We all seem to agree, in general, that it is ridiculous that racial profiling exists. Racial profiling exists because humans want to see themselves as above these streotypes and profiling, yet be realistic enough to know it is there. We as humans struggle to do both without actually profiling an ethnicity. As humans we also hide from change, anything out of the "norm" has always been cause for a build up of unease. The society we live in today has only made it worse, with the amount of crime, fear spawning from it, that takes place everyday.
To counter Marisa L's argument, I'm not sure that respect should overule their safety, we all want to be respected, but does that matter if someone ends up hurt because the authorities figures did not want to "pop our personal bubbles"?
I personally want my safety taken care of, and if, sadly, searching peoples luggage or what not is what it takes, then that is the course of action.
Humans organize everything into neat little groups and cubby holes because that makes our world easier to understand. We run into a problem when it is an emotional ideal that one will try to cubby-hole. The concept of racial profiling means something different to everyone, so no one will completely agree on it, no one an actually pinpoint what it means and how to deal with it because there are so many ideas and situations surrounding it.
First off, I don't think that racial profiling is ok, but all I was saying is that it happens and you can't really do anything about it because that's just how people are. As for what Mr. Webb brought up right after my first blog about if that percentage is that way because of racial profiling or if racial profiling came out of the percentage, which, like Mr. Webb stated, is a bit of "chicken or egg" debate. And this is true. We really can't say how it started and which one came first, but like I said before, these stereotypes that lead to racial profiling have to come from somewhere, people, no matter who they are have some reason for what they do, so I still believe that it is because of the statistics that cops way use racial profiling and really, though it sounds bad, they have every right to. Now in "Racial Profiling" by Amnesty International USA it states when talking about racial profiling that it, "undermines the basic human rights and freedoms to which every person is entitled"("Racial"). I simply ask how? The cops aren't taking away any freedoms or rights they aren't arresting them because they are black or white or mexican, they are simply investigating the common race for crimes and if the person they pull over or whatever has done nothing wrong then they let them go about their business , but if the cops suspicion leads to finding a Colt.45 and a kilo of coke in a guys trunk then I say good job and keep on doing what your doing even if you are using racial profiling. Now maybe a while ago racial profiling would have lead to persons being wrongly accused, like "Hurricane" Carter, which Will J W pointed out earlier, but the times are changing, just look at our new president. So racial profiling may exist, but to say that atleast now in these times, where we now have a black president, that it puts away innocent people because of their skin color, I think is rediculous. Cops may be more suspicious of blacks and may use racial profiling, but when it comes down to making the arrest, I believe ninety-nine percent of the time, they make the arrest for the right reason. This has been Stephen K W saying goodnight and good luck.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I disagree when Marisa L says, “races will never suspect their own.” This is like saying that since I’m Hispanic, I will never suspect anything bad about Hispanics which is not true. Like Savannah M said “If a police officer is letting someone "off the hook" because they're brothers of skin, every criminal would be freed because there are cops of every race.” This is true because if cops are afraid to arrest people of their own race, then who is going to arrest who? I understand what Marisa is trying to say but I don’t agree with it because if what she is saying is true, then crime would increase and cops would not be doing their jobs. Just like Savannah M, I have witnessed black cops arresting blacks regardless of the fact that they are both black. Sometimes people are too sensitive with reality so when some of color is pulled over, they atomically think it’s because of their race. People are too afraid to say anything now because of the sensibility of others.
Courtney W makes a good point when she says, “if minorities have such a problem being racially profiled, there is no one forcing them to stay here.” People constantly complain about racial profiling and how they hate America because of it when in reality America is the only country that respects every race and religion. Everyone has an equal opportunity if they really want. The people that complain most about this are the minorities that are committing the crimes- not they people who are trying to overcome it. If minorities really want to get rid of racial profiling they should try to change it and not complain as much. Mac Donald says, “The ultimate question in the profiling controversy is whether the disproportionate involvement of blacks and Hispanics with law enforcement reflects police racism or the consequences of disproportionate minority crime.” Unfortunately, most gangs are made up of blacks and Hispanics and most terrorist attacks have been committed by people from the middle east. Courtney also brought up a good point by stating, “There are countries where blacks or Hispanics are the majorities and they look at white people suspiciously.” People are always going to stereotype the minority. A society is always going to question and suspect the minority and it doesn’t just happen in America. So if minorities really have a problem with it, they should try to overcome it and not be part of that stereotype.
It is clear, racial profiling does exist. But I feel as though if somebody has not experienced it they do not understand, no matter what ethnicity you are. “The racial profiling debate focuses primarily on highway stops. The police are pulling over a disproportionate number of minority drivers for traffic offenses, goes the argument, in order to look for drugs” (Mac Donald.) A few years ago I was coming home from a basketball game with one of my teammates. My dad, who is black, was driving.(It was a nice car.) We got pulled over for no reason. The officer asked my dad where we were coming from and he said a basketball game. My dad then asked, “Why was I pulled over?” The officer ignored his question and asked my dad, “Sir have you been drinking tonight?” My dad shot back at the officer in disbelief that he would ask him such a thing when he had two young girls in the car. My dad then said, “So why did you pull me over, did I swerve?, I was driving the speed limit.” The officer then had no response and told us to have a nice night.” I was in shock. The officer had no reason to pull us over so what else am I suppose to think. He is a African American, in a nice car, (maybe the officer thought is was drug money), I have no idea except to jump to the conclusion of racial profiling.
“A similar survey in New Jersey found that although people of color were searched more frequently, state troopers found drugs in vehicles driven by whites 25% of the time, by African Americans 13%, and by Latinos 5%.” (Racial) I also thought this was interesting by “Racial” because all of the statistics that have been posted in previous blogs. The Blacks followed my the Hispanics were the majority in the prisons or apart of the judicial system, but according to this statement, the Whites were least checked and 25% of the time had drugs. The African Americans and Latinos have a lower percentage. This proves that it is not always the minorities doing something wrong or going against the law. The majorities are committing the same crimes but are just getting away because of racial profiling.
Courtney W W stated that, “If minorities are so against the racial profiling that exists in America, they do not need to stay here. There is nothing forcing minorities to live in America.” You are right no body is forcing anybody to live in America, but not everybody can just leave. As children and teenagers and even at times young adults, we cannot just up and leave. We are in the hands of our parents. So what if racial profiling is happening to the adolescents, what are we suppose to do just pack our bags and leave and find a new place where racial profiling may not exist. In reality it exists everywhere. Courtney W W also said in, “ Columbine High School, there is more than one race. How are the police supposed to investigate crimes without offending people?” Try to imagine this. What if an officer went up in East High School where the majority is blacks and pulled the few white kids out of class because of a crime investigation and said, “Somebody has hacked into the school computer system and changed information and grades.” (Which is a stereotypical situation.) In reality any race could commit this crime. But wouldn’t you wonder why out of all the people in the school, your race is accused. You would jump to the conclusion of racial profiling. It is the same thing in Columbine High School. If any minority kids were being investigated for drug use, we would all jump to the same conclusion. It is just by instinct.
It has been brought up that humans are afraid of change, if this is true then why did Obama get elected president? Granted, yes some people are afraid of change, but Obama’s whole campaign is based around change, AND he’s black. If a black man running “the most powerful country in the world” doesn’t prove that U.S. have changed then I don’t know what does (The Citizen Newspaper). Two men running a black man and a white man against each other and the black man beats the white man? I think it’s safe to say that, that alone shows that the U.S. citizens are getting over their problems with racial profiling. Obama won the popular vote by over 50 percent. That means that over half of the U.S., black, white, yellow, and purple, liked him better than the white man running. This shows that citizens are starting to realize that skin color doesn’t really matter, it’s the ideas, morals, and strategies that matter most. Although this election is a milestone in U.S. history and it shows our citizens are becoming better people, racial profiling is still an issue and every race needs to work on it.
Mwananchi Communications LTD, comp. "The Citizen Newspaper." The Citizen. 5 Nov. 2008. 9 Nov. 2008 http://thecitizen.co.tz/newe.php?id=8569>.
I am glad to hear Stephen believes “that it is because of the statistics that cops use racial profiling and really, though it sounds bad, they have every right to,” because in her last post, Savannah suggested that “stereotyping is the reason racial profiling even exists.” Both articles for and against racial profiling use statistics to make their points and it is also statistics that get attacked as being incorrect or incomplete. So, everyone else seems to think that it is statistics that are at the heart of racial profiling--and this idea works regardless of whether you think the egg came first or the chicken. I don’t really see how stereotyping plays such a big role in racial profiling. It is not stereotyping that is the reason racial profiling exists. Rather, it is basic common sense (the scientific method) to collect large amounts of information (statistics) and use them to see a trend and to predict the next result, so to speak. The same method is used in chemistry to determine which properties new compounds will have. If it’s the same idea in chemistry as it is in racial profiling, does that mean chemists stereotype Lithium and Magnesium compounds? I don’t really think so; racial profiling always seems to me more of a short cut, a neat trick, to catching criminals based on guessing their descriptions. Without racial profiling, cops would have to completely work in the dark.
Also, I would like to address Courtney W statement that “if minorities have such a problem being racially profiled, there is no one forcing them to stay here.” This is a primitive argument and harms the country (any country) more than helps it . It is simply not a way to solve the problem. The “my way or the highway” method doesn’t really work; in order to survive, a country must be adaptable and flexible, easily changing to accommodate news patterns and changes in the way we think and act. Minorities bring in cultural diversity and ideas necessary to change countries—some for the worse, some for the better. The entire evolution of the civilizations is due to the fact that empires change and adapt— mostly to human migration and new thought patterns. Doing things my-way-or-the-highway way, we would still be in Sumer, trading rocks for pebbles and worshipping every grass blade in the backyard.
First, let me clarify my comment “Because races will never suspect their own.” It is supposed to be people will never use “what we may call ‘hard’ profiling” which “uses race as the only factor in assessing criminal suspiciousness” (Mac Donald) to suspect someone of their own race. I know that white police officers arrest white men, but I don’t believe it is based solely on their race; there are other factors that override the fact that he or she is white, which rules out racial profiling entirely. People don’t profile their own race because then they would fit the description since it is only about race and nothing else. A Hispanic officer won’t pull over another Hispanic driver only because they are Hispanic. It would be hypocritical if the officer racially profiled his or her own race, so I don’t believe it is possible of people. Gabriela D stated, “If cops are afraid to arrest people of their own race, then who is going to arrest who?” Cops are not afraid to arrest people of their own race; they just don’t do it primarily because of their race. There would have to be other suspicions and reasons to pull over someone of their same race.
I disagree with Olga S’s statement “without racial profiling, cops would have to completely work in the dark.” Why do they have to work from race? They can work off tips, or witnesses, or factual evidence; they don’t need to use race to suspect someone of criminal activity. Using race classifies everyone of that race as being a possible criminal. Every race is capable of criminal activity, but not everyone chooses to disobey the law. Racial profiling is simply jumping to conclusions without probable cause. Statistics are not a fair judgement because “the majorities are committing the same crimes but are just getting away because of racial profiling” (Rachel H). Race isn’t a probable cause for suspecting criminal activity, so cops should do their job without judgement and be fair to every race because they do have other resources to work from.
According to a website I went to racial profiling is the "practice of police targeting African Americans for traffic stops because they believe that African Americans are more likely to be engaged in criminal activity." I find that absolutely absurd, and I am sure everyone of my peers doing this blog would agree with me. So if there was a black guy and a white guy doing the exact same thing, the cop would pull over the black guy over the white guy thinking the black guy was the one doing criminal activities when maybe the white guy just got done robbing a convenient store they would not get caught, but a black man dong nothing would get pulled over just because they were black. It is not their fault they are black! I saw that on Rachael H's comment she said a cop actually did pull her father over because he was black, and the cop really had nothing to say back to the questions her father was asking, if the cop was to pull them over they should at least think of answers to possible questions instead of just saying "Have a nice night." and leaving it at that.
Also, Marissa L makes a good point when she talks about cops not pulling over people of their own race, because of course cops will pull over people of their own race. It is their job. Although they might suspect a an African American over a white guy. It could go the other way also such as; an African American cop suspecting a white guy over another African American. It really could go either way.
I forgot to cite the website...
"Racial Profiling of African, Hispanic (Latino), and Asian Americans." Ethnic Magority. Diverse Stradgies Inc.. 9 Nov 2008 http://www.ethnicmajority.com/racial_profiling.htm.
Statistics show that the idea of “An African American cop suspecting a white guy over another African American” does not occur very often, if at all. Racial profiling is most often done against the African American, Mexican, or Arab peoples. Therefore, according to the facts, it usually does not “go either way” (Vanessa G W).
I also have read the some of the personal stories my peers have had, and I’m sorry to say this, but I feel some may be coming to wrongful conclusions about the police that pulled them over. For example, Rachel H W even said “I have no idea except to jump to the conclusion of racial profiling.” Colorado, and numerous other states, has completely “prohibited racial profiling of both motorists and pedestrians” (“Racial”). That does not mean racial profiling does not occur, but it is illegal, hopefully making policemen much less likely to commit such a crime. All humans are internally programmed to classify people, to stereotype, and even to possibly “determine whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime” (WordNet). “Racial profiling is simply jumping to conclusions without probable cause” (Marisa L W); I hope my peers will not jump to conclusions about the policemen that pull people over according to their biased ways learned since childhood. Just as “It is not their fault they are black!” (Vanessa G W), it is not policemen’s fault they’re human.
"Wordnet Search 3.0." WordNet. 2006. Princeton University. 9 Nov 2008 {http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=racial%20profiling}.
The Bedford reader defines racial profiling as “singling out people as suspicious solely because of religious affiliation or physical characteristics such as skin color” (Kenedy /Aaron 558). To extend this definition, racial profiling can include highway stops, airport searches, drug searches, or even just police questioning.
To begin with, I’d like to address Ashley L’s comment about Denver’s black population versus its black involvement in crime. Denver is an extremely poor example to use when it comes to blacks. As she stated, only eleven percent of its population is black. A better example for Denver would be Hispanics. Are they picked on by police? Do Hispanics get pulled over more often than whites in Denver? To be blunt, probably. But is that such a horrible thing. Now obviously each person is going to have his own personal opinions furthered by his own personal prejudices. Personally, I believe that law enforcement’s number one concern should always be public safety. If it is believed that mostly blacks, Hispanics, endanger the public safety or even if it were whites like myself, law enforcement is completely justified in targeting any racial group.
On September eleventh in 2001, our nation was attacked by Al queida hijackers. Most terrorist attacks in the US and out are carried out by middle easterners. After reading Khan’s and Chavez’s essays, it is evident that Middle Eastern people are targeted greatly in the US. While I empathize with the innocent, it is also important to keep people safe. If a few innocent bystanders are inconvenienced by a search, who cares? Any one who is completely innocent should have no problem in proving this. I hate to be apathetic, but for a moment I must. If you are, for instance, an African American, and are targeted just because of your race, I am sorry for your time lost by this; wouldn’t you think, however, that these good citizens would want their country and community to be safe?
Racial profiling is entirely necessary. It is as necessary as gender profiling and age profiling. When a policeman goes out to look for traffic violations, he will encounter hundreds of speeding, road raging, law-breaking drivers in a matter of hours. The search for serious offenses is, sorry for the cliché, like finding a needle in a haystack. Racial profiling allows police to narrow down the large list of offenses they encounter to those that are most likely to lead them to a bigger problem than an overactive odometer. These profiles may not be fair, but they are key in locating drug dealers, illegal aliens, and even fugitives.
The primary victims of racial profiling here, in the United States, are minorities. By minorities I am centralizing my statement around Hispanics, Blacks, and Arabs because they are the examples we have been given.
I’m going to begin by stating my opinion on Courtney W W’s post. She stated “If minorities are so against the racial profiling that exists in America, they do not need to stay here.” I’m a minority and I disagree with racial profiling, but I’m still here. True I don’t have to be here, but I choose to be here. Why? Because I was born and raised in America and I love America and America is my land regardless of my race. But regardless of my attachment for America it has it’s flaws and racial profiling is one of them. I stated this earlier and I will repeat it again, why can’t we look at an individual person and let him or her prove their self rather than let their stereotype prove them? I’ve personally seen how we as a school have helped aid foundations for Invisible Children and have helped aid the homeless with can food drives. Just as we have made a change in such critical issues why can’t we change and not use racial profiling so negatively? Courtney W W asked, “How are the police supposed to investigate crimes without offending people?” The police could easily investigate without offending people. In the case of Rachel H W, both her and her father had every right to be offended because the police man had no reason to pull them over. This is a perfect example of how racial profiling is used in a negative manner. Many people throughout this blog have said that they would prefer to know that the police on highways as well as the security in airports are doing their jobs, than concern themselves with someone’s dignity. I can understand investigating a person who is acting suspicious but why does race have to spark suspicion or be the primary of suspicion? If a man’s record is clean like in Kahn’s situation then why shouldn’t he be allowed in the country, just because he looks Arab? So what, now he must be condemned for his race and looking as he does, as he was born? That’s ultimately what happened in “Close Encounters with US Immigrants,” Kahn wasn’t allowed in America even though all the evidence proved he wasn’t a terrorist. So now America is safe because we kept a terrorist stereotype fitting man out of America even though evidence proved he wasn’t a terrorist. Notice I was being sarcastic. This is why people get offended by racial profiling, because racial profiling is not usually in the interest of justice, but rather of discrimination.
Will J W stated “well saying that I have not experienced racial profiling because I am white is racial profiling.” Actually saying that he has not experienced racial profiling because he is white is stereotypical and could be considered racist, but not racial profiling. Also racial profiling doesn’t so much affect white people in America as it does minorities in America. Lets be realistic when is the last time you saw a white person stopped in an airport because they where white or even on the highway for that matter?
Gabriela D W stated that “America is the only country that respects every race and religion.” Since when is considering race when developing a profile of a suspected criminal respecting every race. When you target someone’s race like that you’re not respecting their race, but discriminating against it. Not only that but how can she ask for people to “overcome” racial profiling “and not be part of that stereotype,” if stereotyping aids racial profiling regardless of if one is part of the stereotype.
Gina H W talked about how “all humans are internally programmed to classify people, to stereotype, and even to possibly ‘determine whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime’ (world net)” and that “it is not policemen’s fault they are human.” So because a police man is “human” that puts me in my place when it comes to racial profiling and therefore I should accept racial profiling. That’s ridiculous. There is an obvious lack of understanding toward the victims of racial profiling. Since the minorities are primarily being targeted by racial profiling the majority doesn’t have to take it so seriously.
Does racial profiling really exist? Most of the blogs on this post have dealt the issue of numbers. To me, numbers do not mean anything. Numbers and statistics are facts. With almost any fact comes an assumption. For example, "Amy is tall, therefore, she would be a great basketball player" is no different from saying "He is black, therefore he must be a drug trafficker". By the way, I am horrible at basketball.
The problem with humans is that we are just that. Human. Unfortunately, our brains are not biologically programmed to be able to just ignore the existence of any fact when it is convenient. Just as noticing that the symbol between those two numbers on our math test means divide instead of multiply helps us, noticing the color of someone's skin can hurt us. Observation is sometimes an inconvenient skill. However, what matters is not the facts. That is where the human part comes in to play. Our brains are not computers. When we notice something, we tend to automatically interpret it to mean something. That is our process of learning. Noticing that there is a big black cloud coming towards us does not do us any good. However, we can then interpret that cloud to mean that a possibility of severe weather is there and we should take cover. Just as Brent Staples comments in "Black Men in Public Space", "Her flight made me feel like an accomplice in tyranny. It also made it clear that I was indistinguishable from the muggers who occasionally seeped into the area from the surrounding ghetto." The woman in this story saw only one thing. A black man on a dark night walking behind her. That was the fact. When the feelings got hurt was when her brain connected the black man walking behind her with the news report she saw on TV last night talking about the black man from the area that was convicted of raping three women at night on the streets. Did that mean that Staples was out to hurt her? Absolutely not. Does that put her at fault for making a reasonably educated connection? Absolutely not.
Racial profiling by definition comes down to connections made by the human brain. These connections are automatic and should not be ignored. Sometimes, they really do save lives. And another thing. Racial profiling goes both ways. Just as I might hold my purse a bit tighter when I walk by a Hispanic man on the street, even if I did not clutch my purse to me, and all I did was look at the man, he might assume that I was judging him to be dangerous.
Racial profiling is simply a fancy name for the human brain's ability to connect one thing to another. To connect things that we come in contact with in our lives and things that are happening in our world today.
I have to say I am a bit alarmed at some of the assumptions and responses here. Certainly, you are each entitled to your own opinions so long as they do not egregiously offend or pose a threat to someone else, but stop and think clearly about what you post.
Racial profiling is a difficult problem/subject to argue, and one that needs to be done so in a sensitive manner. But it is important to tackle difficult issues, not ignore them.
That said, I cannot fathom the nonchalant way some people have addressed random stops (traffic or otherwise). Imagine being judged because of your skin color and then simply be told "sorry for taking your time." I am sorry, but I think that goes a bit deeper than just lost time. To have your very freedom as a human being called into question because of skin color? And people are OK with this? It seems very sad, very primitive, and very narrow to me, and I cannot even recall it occurring to me. And to be told, simply leave the country if you don't like it?
If I picked out three students who just "looked guilty" to me (recall Sherman Alexie)--looked like they could not have been smart enough to complete some paper--and scoured the Internet looking for ways they cheated. Is that OK? What if it were you? What if, even though I found nothing on the net, I pulled you into Mr. DeAngelis' office and brought in a counselor and called your parents and we questioned you for an hour. Would "sorry for your time" satisfy you? And worse, what if I did actually find something, that one of the three students had cheated. Does that validate my methods and excuse the treatment for the other two students?
Be wary of oversimplifying complex arguments. I do not disagree with everything that has been posted here, and the terrorist implications only serve to further complicate things (actually, I was hoping the discussion would have steered that way sooner), but be careful what you are willing to settle for as "OK." If we succumb to the ease of judging each other superficially, where does it stop?
Olga S commented that I was trying to say it should be “my way or the high way in my last post. I’m not trying to say it should be my way or the high way at all. I was just sarcastically suggested a way to solve the problem. Most of us pretty much agree that stereotyping and racial profiling are “easily interchanged” (Savannah). And mostly everyone has agreed that there is no clear way to get rid of racial profiling. So what I’m trying to say is this: since there is no clear cut solution to racial profiling, or a way to get rid of stereotyping, and its really that big of an issue to someone, they shouldn’t have to deal with it. There shouldn’t be anything that forces them to deal with it. I was just suggesting a way to deal with the problem since no one has really suggested any other ways.
Racial profiling is an issue that needs to be solved, but there is no quick fix. Judging because of skin color is something that is learned and probably passed through generations. In his speech in 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. told Americans his dream that his “four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” And in less than 200 years our country has turned from a place with slavery, to a place where the next president is African American. So we are making progress, and we are becoming less stereotypical. But to fix this issue, we need to let time play itself out.
Gina brought up an excellent point when she stated that “some may be coming to wrongful conclusions about the police that pulled them over.” Police don’t only target certain races; there is also age and gender profiling. Just think about this: it is really difficult to see them color of someone’s skin from a distance when they are driving at speeds between 40 and 75 miles per hour. And even if they could see the color of someone’s skin from the side of the highway, and do pull them over, they probably are not racial profiling. Complexion does not always tell someone’s race or ethnicity. Plus, police will pull almost anyone over for almost anything in order to meet their monthly quota of tickets, like not stopping completely at stop sign or something that seems insignificant. So I agree with Gina in saying that people should not jump straight to conclusions about the police.
King, Martin Luther. "I have a dream speech." Lincoln Memorial, DC. 28 Aug 1963.
I am not sure I quite agree with what Amy S is saying. While I understand the scientific facts supporting racial profiling, and how it can be proven that humans do it naturally through patterns in their brain; there is more to racial profiling than that. I find it hard to grasp the fact that such a hurtful thing as racial profiling can just be explained through brain patterns. The scenario of crossing the street when a Hispanic or African-American is walking towards you has been used often. More often than not I am willing to bet, this person won't hurt you. Yet we seem to be afraid of them anyway, because our brain identifies their skin color as one of a bad guy? That seems like a messed up version of a computer to me.
Whether or not anyone chooses to believe me, I can honestly say that I have never felt that fear or unease when someone is walking towards me on a sidewalk. I have walked all through downtown Denver, suburbia, and the mountains; I have been through several airports and major city centers out of state. I have also walked by people with every skin color imaginable. No, not green. . . yet. I am not saying that I have never "profiled" someone. We are human, as Amy S emphasizes and we can all admit to that. I just don't understand the unease that seems to cause the profiling itself. Just because there are numbers supporting a certain ethnicities’ crime rate does not mean we should feel uncomfortable around everyone of that ethnicity. I have a friend, and no, this person is not even in our grade, let alone blopic or classes, who mentioned once that in airports, he or she does a double take when they happen to see someone who looks like they have a Middle Eastern heritage. Simply because of the terrorist attacks . This level of paranoia is ridiculous, and is pretty much an excuse to be mean and hurtful to others in my eyes.
Okay, I must admit Mr. Webb has a very good point. I cannot even fathom my reaction if he were to wrongfully accuse me of such a crime. I think an issue this blog has faced is that a great deal of us had never had the experience of being racially profiled. I myself have taken the side of the policemen. I stand firmly on the fact that racial profiling comes naturally to people, but I now can see that is absolutely wrong to act on such impulses.
Racial profiling is not an effective way to fight crime. Every way someone would try to justify such an offense is shot down in the article by Amnesty International USA. Their article about the truths of racial profiling is enlightening to the white population, who does not face this problem in everyday life. Olga S. stated, “Without racial profiling, cops would have to completely work in the dark.” Skin color is a very dangerous technique for hunting down criminals. For example, in the Oklahoma City bombings, in which the two white attackers were able to get away while officers ran on the assumption that the act had been committed by "Arab terrorists," we find if one works off race alone, murders can escape unscathed.
If police are busy with the black man supposedly carrying drugs across the state, what happens to the white guy holding a gun to someone’s head? “Racial profiling is a proven failure in the ‘war on drugs’” and it “makes us less safe” (“racial”). The facts point to 17% of white people being found with drugs, while only 8% of blacks have been found, even though police search African Americans much more often. Why do they continue to search African Americans more often even though white people are of higher probability of being caught? That, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly the case.
I previously thought that this issue was being taken care of to the best of the country’s ability. I have researched it further and found this to be untrue. Policemen are not “mandated [in the] data collection on law enforcement practices” (“racial”) and the laws passed by George W. Bush in 2003 are ineffective because only Arkansas, California, Alaska, and Massachusetts have full racial profiling bans on religion, race, ethnicity, pedestrians, motorists, and gender. The rest of the country is lax in laws against such crimes; even the four states listed above do not regulate racial profiling sufficiently enough to stop this problem.
Why do we stand for such superficial acts to be committed against our fellow man? Will we pass it off simply because our brain is programmed that way? I did, but I would like to restate my thesis if I may—Racial profiling is in no way acceptable, ever.
To play off of Mr. Webb's most recent post, I would like to insert myself into his given scenario. As stated by Mr. Webb, what if he-- our very own educator-- pulled aside a few essays from students who "looked like they could not have been smart enough to complete some paper--and scoured the Internet looking for ways they cheated. Is that OK? What if it were you?" (Webb). Well, what if it was you? I know that if it was me, Savannah Cay MARTINEZ, there would be hell to pay. This is why I have been trying to deepen our argument past its' judicial surface: racial profiling doesn't just affect someone's record, it effects their souls. Racial profiling is so much more than being pulled over on your way home from a basketball game in a nice car (Rachel H).And yes, those situations matter and should certainly come with consequences, but there is no doubt in my mind that what really affected Rachel, her father, and her sister was not literally being pulled over for no reason, but the reason that the cop couldn't produce a reason. It is because they felt judged, wronged, hurt, and even violated. Not because they were stereotyped. I know that is how I feel when I get judged for my last name: just today I was asked if my family was "border-hoppers." And again, it wasn't the assumption that hurt me, it wasn't even the person who asked it, it was simply the idea that something so simple such as skin-tone, a last name, or religious beliefs is enough to affiliate one with grand theft auto, illegal citizenship, or terrorism. Mr. Webb is right: so many of our posts have been heartless. And I'm not going to sit here and pretend like some of the things I've said weren't, but I do know that I‘ve always looked at Racial Profiling from a point that exceeds the surface..
Racial profiling exists. That's un-debatable. But where it exists has become an issue. This blog began with racial profiling being limited to the law. Whoop-de-do. A few people get pulled-over, some drugs are found, lawsuits erupt, and the list drags on, and on. Yes Racial Profiling is wrong, and yes it also does catch a few crooks, but that's not where racial profiling stops. As I've said before, we are trying to keep it in a box: pretend like it's tame, and secure. "It's only in the law" the naive say, but this is not true in the least to the deep. Almost everyone in this blog has been to another High School no? Well I know from first-hand experience how much people moan-and-groan, whimper, or even panic when they hear that the next debate, volleyball game, or swim meat is at Lakewood (Lake-hood as some may say. See?), Thomas Jefferson (Oh no!), Kent Denver (Look-out!), or Bear Creek (need I say it?). Simply ridiculous. I even remember a certain football game last year when we played Bear Creek that further exemplifies my point. It was chilly, we were ahead. Guests at Jeff Co. Stadium. At the end of the third quarter, a few teenage boys passed out some green note cards to everyone cheering for the Rebs. A chant of “where‘s your green-card?” then echoed through the stands. I stood there baffled: dropped the card. How heartless. How cruel. Granted a majority of their football team was minorities, but who are we to comment upon it? What gives us that right? Are we really so barbaric that we find it “OK” to retreat back to the days of Anglo-Saxton superiority? Calling Abraham Lincoln: minorities want their rights back. Really, just “where does it stop?” (Webb). Sadly, it doesn’t.
I don’t care if Wikipedia says that “Racial profiling is the inclusion of racial or ethnic characteristics in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime or an illegal act”, and I don’t care if Dictionary.com says that it is “the consideration of race when developing a profile of suspected criminals; by extension, a form of racism involving police focus on people of certain racial groups when seeking suspected criminals.” Why? You may ask. Well, I’ll tell you why: racial profiling isn’t simple. It doesn’t just come in black and white (Gina H.). There are more shades of grey (more like brown, tan, and beige if we choose to be literal) than definite colors. When dealing with a problem such as this, one needs to look at the heart of the matter. Not that someone is Black, Muslim, Greek, Hispanic, German, Mexican, Asian, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, Swedish, Indian, Polish, Native American, Irish, or any combination of the latter, but that they’re human.
Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_profiling
Dictionary.com:
racial profiling. (n.d.). Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Retrieved November 10, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racial profiling
Amy S mentioned how she “hold[s] [her] purse a bit tighter when [she] walk[s] by a Hispanic man on the street.” As I was researching, I realized that this tactic is sugested as part of stranger danger. It is suggested under “Saftey Tips While Walking,” that “women should keep their purse close” (stranger danger). So following Amy’s argument, it isn’t a surprise that she would do this as a form of instinct. However, stranger danger doesn’t specify on race so I can’t agree with that part of her argument. When someone looks at a race and proceeds to judge them, it is because of the environment they grew up in that could suggest superiority to another race.
Throughout the blog, it has been suggested that racial profiling does help catch criminals and is therefore useful. For example, the argument goes that if a police man searched 70% of the Hispanic population in their state then 17.5% would be guilty of committing a crime so therefore the police did their job. If one were to think logically, a police man could search 70% of the White population or 70% of the Black population and still find the same statistics.
I completely agree with Savannah M W when she writes, “When dealing with a problem such as this, one needs to look at the heart of the matter. Not that someone is Black, Muslim, Greek, Hispanic, German, Mexican, Asian, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, Swedish, Indian, Polish, Native American, Irish, or any combination of the latter, but that they’re human.” People choose to negate the fact that racial profiling affects people emotionally. It would seem that no one chooses to spare a man’s dignity and refrain from passing judgement. Ultimately racial profiling is wrong because it hurts people by discriminating against them. We as humans are no one to pass judgement upon someone or stereotype, it’s ultimately rude. And for those who say we can’t just change that in ourselves or the population, YES we can. History books prove that change has occurred and so does our president. We can change and not use racial profiling.
“Saftey Tips While Walking.” Saftey Cops.com. Copyright � 2000< http://www.safetycops.com/walker_safety.htm>.
Gina’s response to my comment was, “Since when is considering race when developing a profile of a suspected criminal respecting every race.” I too am Hispanic I understand that racial profiling isn’t right especially when people target us because its not our fault we are a minority-- its something we cannot change. Its frustrating how people stereotype a whole races and put minorities into categories. America is not perfect but the police just doesn’t throw people in jail because of their race. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. This isn’t that case in most countries. And she also says “Not only that but how can she ask for people to “overcome” racial profiling “and not be part of that stereotype” I understand the point she is trying to make but that’s why did it still exists. Minorities don’t think they can ever change this but I think we can, but of course, it’ll take time. There is a difference between complaining about an issue and actually trying to change it . Many minorities complain and how is whining going to change anything? We have to change our own negative stereotype. Most gangs are made up of minorities so of course some ignorant people are going to stereotype all of us, so its up to us to change the way people see us and we can only do that by improving as a race and showing others that we are not all criminals. We should not automatically assume that we are in trouble just because were a minority. When a minority achieves something that is not expected of them, then this changes the perception ignorant people have of us-- and that’s what I mean by overcoming. Like Savannah said, “one needs to look at the heart of the matter. Not that someone is Black, Muslim, Greek, Hispanic, German, Mexican, Asian, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, Swedish, Indian, Polish, Native American, Irish, or any combination of the latter, but that they’re human.” Minorities should integrate themselves into the American society and not thinking of themselves as Latinos, Hispanic, black, Asian, etc. because in the end we are all Americans aren’t we? People should be proud of their heritage and of who they are but not to the extent where they forget that they are also American.
When Gina asks, “why can’t we look at an individual person and let him or her prove their self rather than let their stereotype prove them?” that’s exactly what I mean and that’s the way it should be. We just can’t assume that all Hispanics and blacks are criminals and we can’t assume that every Arab is a terrorist. I know that most criminals are minorities and that’s why I’ve been saying that it’s the minorities responsibly to prove these ignorant people wrong to demonstrate that race should not define us. People should definitely not jump to conclusions and should definitely not judge some one just because of the color of their skin.
Mr. Webb. I hear what your saying. Stuff like being told to leave if you don't like it is pretty harsh and pretty much none of us have really been racially profiled, we go to Columbine High School for crying out loud, this is suburbia. But, I mean this is a tough topic because we have no knowledge in the matter other than some resources we have been given and we are to argue it. That means we have to pick a side and stick with it in order to get our points across, because if we don't stand firm our point will be flimsy and dumb. But not everything is black and white(no pun intended). This is a very gray topic. I mean who am I to say that if a cop pulls over a black guy he is automatically racially profiling that guy. I don't know that. One time my dad got pulled over by a black cop, true story, but did I say, "Hey you stupid racist cop, your pulling my dad over cuz he's white!" No, I did not. I said, "Dad, you stupid idiot, why were you speeding, you suck at driving!" Maybe, not those exact words, but something along those lines. You get the point. All I'm saying is this: There are going to be white people, unlike me, who would probably have thought that the black cop was pulling them over becuase he is black and wants to get back at all the mean white people for the many years of hardships his people had endured. And there are black people who will get pulled over by a white cop because he is white and wants to get back at the mean black people who ruined music with rap and because they don't like Mel Gibson because he was the cooler one in Lethal Weapon. And there are going to be black people who don't think anything of it, and instead take responsibilty for their own actions and not blame it on racial profiling and the whites trying to bring them down. For instance, I was watching the news after Barack Obama was elected and they were interviewing a group of young black men in a barbershop and the young black men were saying some stuff that really made sense to me. They were talking about how for years so many blacks have blamed their problems on other people and didn't ever do anything about, but now that a black man who came from a relatively poor family without a father, grew up, made his own way and now is the president of the United States, they said that blacks should see this and know that they can't blame their problems on the white man bringing them down and look for a handout, they have to accept the responsibilty and do something to better their lives. So hopefully from now on if a black person gets pulled over by a white cop they won't blame it on racial profiling, instead they will accept that maybe, just maybe, it was something they did wrong. This has been Stephen K W saying goodnight and good luck.
Gina H W makes an excellent point when she says " I stand firmly on the fact that racial profiling co mes naturally to people." Because it is very true, even I when I see a tall African American man would tense up, grab my phone, not make eye contact and would quickly pass by. We previously read an essay out of The bedford, talking about the same thing as I am. "To her a youngish black man--a broad six feet two inched with a beard and billowing hair, both hands shoved into the pockets of a bulky miliarty jacket--seemed melancingly close. After a few more quick glimpses, she picked up her pace and was soon running in earnest." (Bedford Reader, Staples, 208) Even this lady got a bit frighted of the fact there was a tall African American man was in her presence at night. It is not right, it really is not. Although to most people it is a natural instinct.
Stephen K WW says: "There are going to be white people, unlike me, who would probably have thought that the black cop was pulling them over because he is black and wants to get back at all the mean white people for the many years of hardships his people had endured". I could not agree more, because there really is white people who believe that.
I hope this does not come out the wrong way, but I do feel that at times African Americans and Hispanics think that the white cop is out to get them. I am only saying this because my cousin--who is in some kind of gang--will always rip on white cops, and how they always catch them and talk about how he hates white people. Well, maybe if him and his idiot little gang members were not out doing stupid things the cop would not have to arrest them.
Staples , Brent. "Black Men and Public Space."The Bedford Reader. 10th ed. 2009.
Gina E W posed this question, "Lets be realistic when is the last time you saw a white person stopped in an airport because they where white or even on the highway for that matter?". I have definitely seen white people getting pulled over and also being stopped in airports. Now I do not know if it was because they were white. Maybe it was a random security check. But if a Middle Eastern person gets checked everyone assumes it is without a doubt because of his race. We as people, not just one race, but all races, make this into a racial profiling case. It is logic that if a Middle Eastern person is stopped in an airport, which is rare because they are a minority, that they are being racially profiled by security. If a white man is stopped, its acceptable because they are the minority and there is a greater chance a white person would be picked at random.
Being treated equally is the right thing to do. No one should be treated differently because they are different. Many people in our country have without a doubt been racially profiled. I cannot imagine the frustration and pain it has caused anyone who is racially profiled. But it does not stop. There is always someone to fight or oppose. Often I have wondered why countries in the Middle East hate the United States and why they cannot just live over in Asia in peace. For some reason, it is impossible. Just as impossible as whites and blacks getting along back in the day. There will always be someone who is different. But I think racial profiling is getting better. More races are getting along together and now, I know this is being over used, but it is a great accomplishment, we have an African American President.
The world is a cruel place. Many wrongs have been done to people. And people decide to hurt others on a trait that should not be considered, race. People need to look at character rather than race. They need to see deeper in to someone's personality rather than stopping on the surface. Yes, cops, security, and other people profile people by race. Assumptions and stereotypes are made. But the world is unfair. There has to be two different sides to everything. White and black. Wrong and right. It is up to society and the people of our country to find what is right. And it is our responsibility to do everything we can to prevent what is wrong, racial profiling.
Before I get into my main point, I would like to point something out to Rachel H. My father is a retired state trooper and worked on traffic enforcement for many years prior to flying. According to him, “any policeman can follow any given driver of any age, race, experience level, and profession with any given car make model year color or speed for two miles and find something to pull the driver over for.” Many times we don’t even realize we are doing anything wrong, and many times we aren’t. Remember this, an officer can pull you over merely on the suspicion that you are not wearing a seat belt. Other times, the type of car affects who gets pulled over. It is common knowledge that red cars get pulled over much more often just because they draw attention to themselves. Perhaps the officer had a warrant out for a stolen car the same make as yours, perhaps he or she suspected your father’s seatbelt wasn’t on. I could list out hundreds of reasons why he pulled you over. Perhaps he was just in a bad mood, and wanted to give someone a ticket for anything at all (yes, this does happen), but the bottom line is it is just as unfair for you to assume your race was the only reason for being pulled over as it would be for him to pull you over just on those grounds. I am in no way trying to be “heartless” (Savannah M) or apathetic or discount your story or your feelings towards it in any way.
This leads me to my next point. There is a world of difference between racial profiling, and racism. Racial profiling has mostly a negative connotation, but can actually be positive. It is more like a stereotype. Racism is a completely different thing. Racism is when you treat someone worse or view him or her negatively because of his or her race. Racism is using racial profiling to negatively affect the way people view others. (I.e.: to invoke fear). Racism involves personal feelings of hatred or fear towards someone because of their race alone. Most instances of what we have talked about so far are actually racism. Mr. Webb, I do not mean to be rude or insensitive, I promise. I just feel that our blog has turned this topic over merely to the negative aspect of racial profiling, when in actuality it can be positive. On the negative standpoint, racial profiling often turns into racism, and it does not take much for this to happen. It is very easy to go from being slightly suspicious of Middle Eastern men and women at airports or other public places, to being fearful or frightened by their presence. But here’s the thing, racial profiling can also be beneficial. For instance, Barack Obama, regardless of whether he deserves the presidency or not (please don’t bring that into this blog, that’s not what its about) gained votes because he is half African American. To him, this aspect of racial profiling is good, because he gained votes. This shows the how the usual connotation of racial profiling can be wrong, and that it can actually be beneficial.
This blog topic has become intense. Savannah M W’s recent blog is completely true. It is so much deeper then everybody is making it out to be. It starts as--in cases-- an innocent action and leads to it hitting at the heart. Racial profiling becomes personal. This is a very hard topic to blog about because many people have never thought deep into racial profiling, including me. Racial profiling is really understood with research or first hand personal experiences. If one is not willing to look deep into the whole picture, only statistics stand out, and only certain point of views define the meaning of racial profiling. The true meaning comes from understanding the issue, feeling emotions as though you were in the situation, and noticing how issues are dealt with. Like Savannah M W states, “it effects their souls” as in everybody it is happening to.
To pull somebody over, officers need a probable cause. According to this article I read, the article was talking about how officers practiced racial profiling to be able to pull over a certain race at any time. The situation I read was to find vehicles with marijuana inside. “The memo told park rangers to develop probable cause for stop...if a vehicle stop is conducted and no marijuana is located and the vehicle has Hispanics inside, at a minimum we would like all individuals FI'd [field interrogated].” (Anderson/Callahan) Field interrogation is the act of interrogating or questioning; examination by questions; inquiry. This is wrong, but here is a great example of racial profiling occurring.
There are also laws that prohibit law enforcers to pull over anybody because of appearance, such as age of gender. Courtney W W stated, “there is also age and gender profiling.” If there is this is against the law and the law enforcers can get in trouble for it. Courtney W W also stated “since there is no clear cut solution to racial profiling, or a way to get rid of stereotyping, and its really that big of an issue to someone, they shouldn’t have to deal with it.” The fact that this says, “and its really that big of an issue to someone” is unbelievable. It is a huge issue whether is affects you or not. Nobody should have to deal with it. Ever. So many need to try to put themselves into a situation, and try to go deep inside and see how you would feel. How this would effect your view of the judicial system, or of any body who is racial profiling. Whether it is personal or global it is a huge issue and it should not be if “it is really that big of an issue to someone.” It should be a huge issue for everyone and should be taken sensitively.
Gina H W stated that “laws passed by George W. Bush in 2003 are ineffective because only Arkansas, California, Alaska, and Massachusetts have full racial profiling bans on religion, race, ethnicity, pedestrians, motorists, and gender.” This is pathetic. This proves that the issue means nothing to many Americans, for it not to become effective everywhere. This law should not be a state law, instead it needs to be a national law.
Because this is a national issue and minorities are being targeted the most, the majority just doesn’t understand all the time. I will admit I have had to hold back my anger and frustration during this whole blog because it is the matter of just getting it. Just getting and understanding the situation. Understanding the effects it has on the society and on a personal level of many people. This issue can go deep enough and touch the heart and soul. When racial profiling occurs it is never forgotten. And I do not think many will understand until it has happened to them. They will see how it feels to have so much anger and sadness, and how it feels to never forget an incident as hurtful as being judged just by your appearance.
Anderson, Callahan, William, Gene. "Reason Online." The Roots of Racial Profiling. August/September 2001. 10 Nov 2008 http://www.reason.com/news/show/28138.html.
(Anderson/Callahan)
Before I can logically blog about this topic, I need to address a few personal issues. First, to a much earlier post by Gina H—the Jewish people are indeed a race, do some research. Second, to every one of my peers who has belittled this subject, let me just say that it is truly a shame that after 232 years of the United States of America’s being a country, that this is how far we’ve come. To those saying if we don’t like it, leave: your ancestors once came here as well. This country is as much mine as it is yours. And though half of my ancestors came here for the same reasons as the majority of yours, the other half were brought here in chains. But, they overcame those chains and turned them into determination and perseverance, despite the people who told them that they should just “leave” (Courtney W.)
The greatest part about this country is that we are all entitled to our own opinion, so of course it is natural for disagreements. However, we have established that racial profiling does indeed exist. Now, whether you believe is should be ended or carried on is by God your own opinion. But, I must come back to the issue of whether or not it is indeed better safe than sorry. If we only see in black and white and brown and red, then we should drop the “united” out of the United States of America. A man wearing a shirt that had, in English and Arabic, “We will not be silenced,” written on it, was not allowed to board a JetBlue airline plane, simply because of his race and t-shirt. Are you serious? He was told that wearing a shirt with Arabic writing on it was the equivalent to a “person wearing a T-shirt at a bank stating, 'I am a robber.'" Honestly, that is so beyond ridiculous, and it makes me wonder what is happening to this country, to this world?
Lisa M says that, “Perhaps the officer had a warrant out for a stolen car the same make as yours, perhaps he or she suspected your father’s seatbelt wasn’t on. I could list out hundreds of reasons why he pulled you over.” But perhaps, Lisa, the officer pulled me over, because I have dark brown hair and tan skin, and I was speaking Spanish and listening to 50 cent. Perhaps he pulled me over because I had hot pink nails and bright red lips, and I had three different-looking babies in the back of my car. No, wait, that’s not possible is it? Or even likely? Maybe he pulled me over because he was simply “in a bad mood” (Lisa M.)
Once again, forgot to cite my source.
American Civil Liberties Union.
Racial Profiling.
10 Nov 2008.
< http://www.aclu.org/racialjustice/racialprofiling/index.html >
This comment has been removed by the author.
Okay, first off, I would like to clarify my point that everyone seems to have taken offense to. I was not trying to be insensitive, hurtful, or anything of that nature. All that I was trying to do was look at the issue under a different light. One that looks at racial profiling as a simple brain function rather than a "we are all out to get each other" mentality. This blog is meant, from my understanding, to examine an issue under all lights, from all angles, and see all opinions. All I was attempting to do was throw another angle in that I saw. If I offended anyone, please accept my apologies.
Now. I tend to be a person that is less involved with emotion on these types of issues that affect our world. I really do believe that emotion creates war. If we could all sit down and logically examine an issue, we probably would not feel the need to shoot each other. However, that is a whole separate issue that I will not go into right now. I understand that feeling like you have been singled out, quite simply put, sucks. It has happened to me and I am sure it has happened to 90% of my classmates, probably not for race, but singled out nonetheless. Probably a month or so ago, I got a speeding ticket. I am now paying $235 out of my own pocket to pay for that mistake. Did I feel singled out that day? Absolutely. That traffic stop took up my whole lunch hour and utterly ruined the rest of my day. That time was valuable to me, and I was sent back to class with nothing but an empty stomach and $235 gone out of my wallet.
I certainly felt singled out that day. I was mad at the cop for doing nothing but his job, and blamed him for ruining my day, when I could have avoided it altogether. This brings me to my point. Could I say that the cop singled me out because I was a teenager? Probably. It certainly would not have been an unreasonable assumption. After all, there was a woman driving a mini van right next to me, going about the same speed, and who got the ticket? The teenager. Does that mean that that is why the cop pulled me over? No. He was doing his job. I can think what I like, but I doubt that he saw a teenager driving the car. I would be willing to bet that all he saw was the number on his radar gun.
While I am not trying to dispute that racial profiling is a very hurtful tactic, and I will not say that it is right by any standards. All I am trying to say is that no one can ever really know the intentions behind another person's actions. I think that we can all agree that the world is a hurtful place. And, as Stephen said, "they said that blacks should see this and know that they can't blame their problems on the white man bringing them down and look for a handout, they have to accept the responsibilty and do something to better their lives. So hopefully from now on if a black person gets pulled over by a white cop they won't blame it on racial profiling, instead they will accept that maybe, just maybe, it was something they did wrong."
I am really not a heartless person, and I am truely sorry if I come off that way. I just think that we have all had our hardships in life, and that if this is truely America, and we truely want an even playing field for all races, no one race should receive more sympathy than another. We all need to grow a little bit thicker skin.
To the question the Gina E posts that Will comments to also, "Lets be realistic when is the last time you saw a white person stopped in an airport because they where white or even on the highway for that matter?" There are white people pulled over all the time. I have been pulled over and at the airport I had to get double checked in the security line, because of my belly button piercing. So, I personally do not know what kind of point Gina M is trying to get from that question. Yes, maybe a Middle Easter person will be suspected in an airport before a white person, due to the attacks on the world trade center, but white people getting stopped on the highway? That happens all the time.
"When racial profiling occurs it is never forgotten. And I do not think many will understand until it has happened to them. " Rachael H posted in her last blog, which is very true. Many of us have never truly experienced it, so many of us can not say to much on this topic, other than what we have researched. I do understand where Rachael is coming from though, because of the fact her father did get pulled over for no reason(Posted in an earlier blog.) Lisa M though does make a good point though when she mentions that cops do pull people over for the littlest reasons. My uncle is a cop and he even said that too. They need to get their quota, so they will pull people over for stupid reasons, but they need to do their job.
I have not yet decided how to take Mr. Webb’s post. Part of me thinks he is using preying on our emotions to see how many of us will flip flop based on what our teacher tells us, and I am going to go off of that part of me. Amy S stated: “Racial profiling by definition comes down to connections made by the human brain. These connections are automatic and should not be ignored.” This is beyond a doubt true. While it is true that racial profiling cannot be completely attributed to science and uncontrollable biology, it is also true that it is an instinct, and cannot be completely eliminated from any society. As humans, we are designed to feel superior. This includes other humans. Each race will biologically feel somewhat superior to other races. This is not a bad thing unless taken to far (I.e.: racism), and is a natural occurrence. Racial profiling is a similarly natural occurrence.
Racial profiling is an issue when and only when it turns into racism. While it would be wrong for someone to be targeted on their race alone, it is also inexcusable to use racial profiling as a means of justifying ones own actions or as an excuse. I am in no way suggesting that anyone on this blog has done so, I am merely pointing out that it is very easy to discount getting pulled over to “because I’m black” or “because I’m a woman.” In our world people hate taking the blame for their own actions, and blaming it on race is probably the greatest excuse one can have. It is generally impossible to tell when an officer or TSA (transportation security administration) is discriminating based on race. The assumption that it is there happens a lot.
Amendment Four of the Bill of Rights states this, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” In response to Mr. Webb’s most recent blog, I would like to ask a much more fundamental question. When did we give up the rights stated in this amendment?
Here is my line of thought: if it is not okay for a white cop to pull over a black man because the cop might have pulled the black man over because he was black, then why would it be okay for a white cop to pull over a white person for seemingly no reason? America is all about an even playing field right? Equality for everyone. To me, an unjustified highway stop falls under violation of the person. So why is it that we are not fighting against this whole issue? Why is it that cops are allowed to pull us over? Why is it that airline employees are allowed to go through our bags? Or better yet, why is it okay for a man of one race acting under government employment to violate the fourth amendment rights of someone of his own race, but certainly not okay for the same government employee to violate, in the same manner mind you, the fourth amendment rights of someone who is of a different race? I feel as though some of the posts on this blog have been leaning in this very direction. As long as the highway cop stays within his own race, he can pull anyone over, justified or not, but the second he does the same to someone of a different race, it is racial profiling.
To me, that way of thinking goes back to the times of segregation. The idea of integration is that of everyone, of every race being able to interact freely, without having the bounds of considering race. So. Why should our highway cop have to worry about someone thinking that he is racially profiling them when integration gave him the rights to do that? Why do we all have to be so careful around each other because of race? Does that not fall under the concept of segregation?
Should we not all, as Americans, not separate races, but as Americans, under this line of thinking, be protesting these safety precautions as being violating of our Constitutional rights? I really do believe in equal opportunity for everyone. So why is what is violating the rights of a person of one race, not violating the rights of a person from another race, say a majority?
This blopic is closed.
<< Home