What Exactly Is Wrong With Profiling?

[Fastbreak]

At least one poster in this thread would consider this excellent police work. As loathsome as this example is, it only scratches the surface of the more nefarious uses of racial profiling and discrimination.

 

I think a better question might ask, what isn’t wrong with racial profiling?

This post validates just how effectively agenda driven media have commanded the issues. The title of this thread is "What's wrong with profiling" not "Racial Profiling" but simply "profiling". Even so, virtually every post against "profiling" rails against "racial profiling".

 

I have stated clearly that racism is wrong. I have stated that race is merely one possible component among thousands of the valid applications of profiling. That profiling strictly by race alone results in the ridiculous example set forth by Habib above. And yet, we're still stuck on racism is wrong, some police are racists so profiling is bad.

 

This is as absurd as tossing the baby out with the bath water or burning down a perfectly good barn to be rid of a few rats.

[Getslow]

^ I might be with you on this. Could you explain how profiling works from a law enforcement standpoint? Profiling based strictly on race is a problem for me but I'm curious as to how it might be used in a non-racial context to aid in enforcement strategies.

[Habib]

This post validates just how effectively agenda driven media have commanded the issues. The title of this thread is "What's wrong with profiling" not "Racial Profiling" but simply "profiling". Even so, virtually every post against "profiling" rails against "racial profiling".

 

I have stated clearly that racism is wrong. I have stated that race is merely one possible component among thousands of the valid applications of profiling. That profiling strictly by race alone results in the ridiculous example set forth by Habib above. And yet, we're still stuck on racism is wrong, some police are racists so profiling is bad.

 

This is as absurd as tossing the baby out with the bath water or burning down a perfectly good barn to be rid of a few rats.

 

Racial profiling is exactly what this thread is concerned with. It was specifically started as a result of the debate over the profiling of Hispanics. The scenario I painted above was nearly identically described earlier in this thread as a sound practice by several posters. After all, no harm, no foul. To pretend that the disagreement with profiling is a disagreement with police searching specific descriptions in association with crimes, or elderly ladies concerned more with burly men in dimly lit parking lots than other elderly ladies, but not the fear of an arbitrary use of power or racial discrimination is just that, fantasy.

 

I’m not sure what “agenda driven media” has to do with this topic either, except, predictably, providing a meaningless excuse to dismiss the post without engaging the substance.

[Run To State]

Whatever man. The stats you brought up there just looked like it was more likely for the law to be enforced on minority races. The police have no side of the story in NWO's situation. What kind of story would they have? "Be on the lookout, there is a black male going around robbing pop machines all around town!!!". Racial profiling is wrong and there is no possible way of justifying it in my mind.

 

And I don't have much for a cop that is going to profile. Being suspicious of black males in a prodominantly white neighborhood is stupid....Segregation ended quite a while ago. Thinking that every latino person you see who's speaking spanish is an illegal immigrant is being a bigot. Attaching any stereotype to anyone you don't know is crazy. Profiling is UnAmerican.

You simply aren't listening, so I'm moving on.

[Run To State]

This post validates just how effectively agenda driven media have commanded the issues. The title of this thread is "What's wrong with profiling" not "Racial Profiling" but simply "profiling". Even so, virtually every post against "profiling" rails against "racial profiling".

 

I have stated clearly that racism is wrong. I have stated that race is merely one possible component among thousands of the valid applications of profiling. That profiling strictly by race alone results in the ridiculous example set forth by Habib above. And yet, we're still stuck on racism is wrong, some police are racists so profiling is bad.

 

This is as absurd as tossing the baby out with the bath water or burning down a perfectly good barn to be rid of a few rats.

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

[Fastbreak]

^ I might be with you on this. Could you explain how profiling works from a law enforcement standpoint? Profiling based strictly on race is a problem for me but I'm curious as to how it might be used in a non-racial context to aid in enforcement strategies.

My posts 2, 47 and 56 touch on this. When you watch "Monk" "Sherlock Holmes" "Silence of the Lambs" "Murder She Wrote" "Psych" or virtually any other detective mystery, you watch the sleuth build a profile of the criminal. (Are we still allowed to call criminals "criminals" or does that hurt their feelings?)

 

When 100% of all terrorist bombers flying on domestic airlines fit a specific "profile" it is PC foolishness not to accord others fitting that same profile added scrutiny. That does not mean we waterboard them, beat them with hoses and taunt them with surly French epithets, but where is the logic in ignoring the clear facts and simply being more aware?

 

I understood this thread to be dealing with profiling at large, not simply the abuses of bona fide racism perpetrated under the ignorant guise of racial profiling. The two are not one and the same. To assert otherwise is ignorance perpetuating ignorance. This is what I was attributing to an agenda driven media, but if others want to join their folly, so be it.

[Run To State]

Racial profiling is exactly what this thread is concerned with. It was specifically started as a result of the debate over the profiling of Hispanics. The scenario I painted above was nearly identically described earlier in this thread as a sound practice by several posters. After all, no harm, no foul. To pretend that the disagreement with profiling is a disagreement with police searching specific descriptions in association with crimes, or elderly ladies concerned more with burly men in dimly lit parking lots than other elderly ladies, but not the fear of an arbitrary use of power or racial discrimination is just that, fantasy.

 

I’m not sure what “agenda driven media” has to do with this topic either, except, predictably, providing a meaningless excuse to dismiss the post without engaging the substance.

I started this thread and I was talking about profiling used as a tool. I wasn't talking about racist cops hellbent on harassing African Americans or Hispanics for kicks. No one said cases of wrongdoing doesn't or hasn't happened nor does anyone on here condone it when it does. That being said, profiling is a very useful tool is pretty much unavoidable in law enforcement. It's absurd to pretend it's useless or unnecessary.

[CatsCatsCats]

You simply aren't listening, so I'm moving on.

 

I didn't find a valid argument in anything you said, so go ahead. Sure if you cast a wide net you'll catch some criminals, but racial profiling is offensive and tramples all over the rights of the people who have to take time out of their day to be accused of crimes they know nothing about just because of how they look. I'm sorry but (for example) stopping a white person in a prodominantly hispanic neighborhood because there have been some reports of crime by white individuals in that area is just racist.

 

But maybe if Obama is the socialist/communist dictator that many conservatives try to paint him as, just maybe we'll have to go through a check point at the beginning of every neighborhood. Maybe we'll just be restricted to parts of town where people fit our race, religion, and socioeconomic status.

[Run To State]

I understood this thread to be dealing with profiling at large, not simply the abuses of bona fide racism perpetrated under the ignorant guise of racial profiling. The two are not one and the same. To assert otherwise is ignorance perpetuating ignorance. This is what I was attributing to an agenda driven media, but if others want to join their folly, so be it.

You are 100% correct. They absolutely are NOT one in the same. Once again, well said! :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

[Run To State]

I didn't find a valid argument in anything you said, so go ahead. Sure if you cast a wide net you'll catch some criminals, but racial profiling is offensive and tramples all over the rights of the people who have to take time out of their day to be accused of crimes they know nothing about just because of how they look. I'm sorry but (for example) stopping a white person in a prodominantly hispanic neighborhood because there have been some reports of crime by white individuals in that area is just racist.

 

But maybe if Obama is the socialist/communist dictator that many conservatives try to paint him as, just maybe we'll have to go through a check point at the beginning of every neighborhood. Maybe we'll just be restricted to parts of town where people fit our race, religion, and socioeconomic status.

You just can't seen to get it through your head that we're not talking about, as Fastbreak put it, the abuses of bona fide racism perpetrated under the ignorant guise of racial profiling. But since you can't seem to get past that, I don't see the point.

[CatsCatsCats]

I started this thread and I was talking about profiling used as a tool. I wasn't talking about racist cops hellbent on harassing African Americans or Hispanics for kicks. No one said cases of wrongdoing doesn't or hasn't happened nor does anyone on here condone it when it does. That being said, profiling is a very useful tool is pretty much unavoidable in law enforcement. It's absurd to pretend it's useless or unnecessary.

 

How about cops & others just doing their jobs, without stepping on the toes of law-abiding citizens? In my experience when a cop is looking for a certain description of a person and they've asked me about it, it was more like being accused. I don't take lightly to be accused of crimes because I try to be an honest, law-abiding citizen.

[CatsCatsCats]

You just can't seen to get it through your head that we're not talking about, as Fastbreak put it, the abuses of bona fide racism perpetrated under the ignorant guise of racial profiling. But since you can't seem to get past that, I don't see the point.

 

No, it's all racist. Being automatically assuming that a middle-eastern person at an airport is a terrorist is a form of racism IMO.

[Run To State]

How about cops & others just doing their jobs, without stepping on the toes of law-abiding citizens? In my experience when a cop is looking for a certain description of a person and they've asked me about it, it was more like being accused. I don't take lightly to be accused of crimes because I try to be an honest, law-abiding citizen.

:ohbrother: If you look like someone that just stole a little old lady's purse, clothes match and so on, you're toes are going to get stepped on and darn well should.

[Run To State]

No, it's all racist. Being automatically assuming that a middle-eastern person at an airport is a terrorist is a form of racism IMO.

OK, you go your merry little way thinking that. Have a good day.

[CatsCatsCats]

:ohbrother: If you look like someone that just stole a little old lady's purse, clothes match and so on, you're toes are going to get stepped on and darn well should.

 

That wouldn't be profiling that would be matching a description to a T. If a thief has my complexion (not likely) is the same height & weight as me, and is wearing the same outfit by all means stop me. But most of the time that's not the case. Where do you come up with this stuff? That's about the most hypothetical of the hypothetical man.:idunno: