Racial Profiling... Pros And Cons

[MIKolbe]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1099191' date='Oct 23 2006, 02:23 PM']
Can you produce evidence for this "simple fact", broken down by every race throughout the world?
[/quote]
interesting website..

this [url="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/ageracesex.htm"]page[/url] may be interesting, but only shows homicides..

the page is part of the Bureau of Justice Statistics.. i am sure you can find what is needed to prove or disprove the above sub-thread...

but in the end, it may be of little consequence to this discussion..

overall, profiling seems to make common sense. If a guy, who looks like me, is blowing up buildings, you should be on the lookout for people who look like me. To harrass old mother hubbard because she is knitting an afgan, seems reaching to say the least, and a waste of resources to boot.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1099191' date='Oct 23 2006, 03:23 PM']
Can you produce evidence for this "simple fact", broken down by every race throughout the world?
[/quote]
I realize that this is a touchy topic, and I risk being labeled "racist" for even bringing this up. Maybe I should have clarified, but I was actually referring to crime in the U.S. - I don't know a lot about crime statistics world-wide, and with regards to police profiling and blacks, it is usually America that is being discussed. I don't see why I should have to give something broken down by "every race throughout the world" - the crime rates of say, Eskimos, or East African Bushmen, are not really relevant to my point.

Anyway, here's a Wikipedia article: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime"]Race and Crime[/url], which provides some charts. I'd recommend checking out the sources linked to. [url="http://www.amren.com/color.pdf"]Here's a lengthy report on the topic.[/url]

While racism may be a factor in disproportionate arrests/incarcerations for blacks, the discrepancy is too huge to be blamed entirely on police racism. Few would deny that blacks do in fact commit more crimes per capita than whites. (And they are also the victims of much more crime.) I am not arguing here that there is something intrinsic to being of the black race that makes people more likely to commit crime; I'd say that is more of a socio-economic problem. The simple fact is that a kid growing up in the ghetto will have much more temptation towards getting involved in gangs, drugs, and crime than an upper-middle-class kid from the 'burbs, and this problem of course begets a vicious cycle for many poor blacks.
Of course, discussing all the factors involved with black poverty, crime, environment, etc., would require a whole other debate thread.

All I'm doing here is saying that "racial profiling" by police has reasons beyond simple racism, and can be legitimate, so long as people's rights are not being clearly violated.

[Era Might]

[quote]Few would deny that blacks do in fact commit more crimes per capita than whites. (And they are also the victims of much more crime.) I am not arguing here that there is something intrinsic to being of the black race that makes people more likely to commit crime; I'd say that is more of a socio-economic problem. The simple fact is that a kid growing up in the ghetto will have much more temptation towards getting involved in gangs, drugs, and crime than an upper-middle-class kid from the 'burbs, and this problem of course begets a vicious cycle for many poor blacks.[/quote]
The prison population as of 1997:

[quote]Whites: 3,429,000

Blacks: 2,149,900

Other: 113,600

-[url="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/cpracetab.htm"][u]SOURCE[/u][/url]-[/quote]
So while, by your own admission, race is a disproportionate factor in the incarceration of black Americans, the number of white Americans in prison still outweighs black Americans by more than a million people.

[quote]All I'm doing here is saying that "racial profiling" by police has reasons beyond simple racism, and can be legitimate, so long as people's rights are not being clearly violated.[/quote]
I have no idea what this means in any practical way. If a black man is riding in a car, is he to be suspected of committing a crime?

Consider, for example:

[quote]Half of all multiple-offender rape/sexual assault victimizations (49.4%) were committed by Whites, 29.5% by Blacks, 15.5% by mixed races, and 5.7% by other races than White or Black.

-[url="http://www.swcp.com/nmcsaas/statistics.html"][u]SOURCE[/u][/url]-[/quote]
Whites comprise 50% of repeat sex offenders. So if a white man is driving in a car with a child, should he at least be suspected of sexual misconduct with that child, since he fits the profile of a repeat sex offender?

Race very rarely has anything to do with a legitimate investigation. If you're looking for a black man, and you see a black man, that alone is not enough to stop somebody. If you're looking for a fat black man driving an old pickup truck, and you see a fat black man driving an old pickup truck, then that's a legitimate use of race in a profile. But just because someone is white or black is not reason enough to suspect them of a crime. I sure hope we don't start stopping white men who are with a child because they fit the profile of a sex offender.

It's easy for white Americans to blow off racial profiling, but when white Americans outnumber black Americans by 200 million, then it's completely understandable why racial profiling would be brought into question. Imagine living in a land as a Catholic outnumbered by 200 million Muslims. You might not think everyone had your best interest in mind.

Let's not forget that this is a country that sustained institutional slavery of black Americans for more than a century and a half, and it has only been a few decades since black Americans started to receive civil rights. Whether we like it or not, we are still living with the institutional effects of our history, and we have cause to be concerned about racial profiling. It's not like America has a legacy of kumbaya when it comes to race.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1099459' date='Oct 23 2006, 07:51 PM']
The prison population as of 1997:
So while, by your own admission, race is a disproportionate factor in the incarceration of black Americans, the number of white Americans in prison still outweighs black Americans by more than a million people.
I have no idea what this means in any practical way. If a black man is riding in a car, is he to be suspected of committing a crime?

Consider, for example:
Whites comprise 50% of repeat sex offenders. So if a white man is driving in a car with a child, should he at least be suspected of sexual misconduct with that child, since he fits the profile of a repeat sex offender?

Race very rarely has anything to do with a legitimate investigation. If you're looking for a black man, and you see a black man, that alone is not enough to stop somebody. If you're looking for a fat black man driving an old pickup truck, and you see a fat black man driving an old pickup truck, then that's a legitimate use of race in a profile. But just because someone is white or black is not reason enough to suspect them of a crime. I sure hope we don't start stopping white men who are with a child because they fit the profile of a sex offender.

It's easy for white Americans to blow off racial profiling, but when white Americans outnumber black Americans by 200 million, then it's completely understandable why racial profiling would be brought into question. Imagine living in a land as a Catholic outnumbered by 200 million Muslims. You might not think everyone had your best interest in mind.

Let's not forget that this is a country that sustained institutional slavery of black Americans for more than a century and a half, and it has only been a few decades since black Americans started to receive civil rights. Whether we like it or not, we are still living with the institutional effects of our history, and we have cause to be concerned about racial profiling. It's not like America has a legacy of kumbaya when it comes to race.
[/quote]
You have as yet provided no solid evidence against the statistics showing that blacks have much higher rates of crime [i]per capita[/i] than whites and other races. (Did you even look at the charts of homicide rates?) If you have anything which effectively debunks such statisitics as false, I'd be open and happy to see it, but you have not done this. (You have instead tried to fudge things by using [i]total numbers[/i] while ignoring the fact that the total number of whites in America is still considerably higher than that of blacks. Thus the [i]rates[/i] for blacks are significantly higher.)

The debate concerned racial profiling. I simply provided a statistical fact. Rather than provide counter-statistics, or solid evidence proving my statistics false, you have made an emotionally-based response, with little in the way of substance.

If you can provide something authoritative showing that whites do in fact commit as many or more crimes [i]per capita[/i] than blacks, I'd be open to seeing it.

I'm not making a racist argument - merely providing statistics. A greater proportion of blacks than whites come from rough backgrounds (for reasons not entirely their own fault), and people from rough backgrounds of any race are more likely to be involved in crime. If a group of people is statistically more likely to be involved in crime, they are more likely to get the attention of the police. It may not be "fair", but that's the way it is.

(And if this discrepancy is entirely due just to police racism, how do you account for pretty much the same arrest levels when the cops involved are themselves black?)

Edited October 24, 2006 by Socrates

[Era Might]

You have not proven anything, except that people in poor areas commit more crime than people who are not in poor areas. It has nothing to do with whether they are black or not. To say "blacks are more likely to commit crime than whites", and then somehow use that to justify racial profiling, is a false argument, because race has nothing to do with the matter. If you want to say people in poor areas, irrespective of race, should be profiled, then that would flow logically from the point you are making. Poverty has something to do with crime. The color of your skin does not. It's like saying "Catholics commit more crimes per capita than Protestants, therefore, Catholics should be profiled and suspected of a crime". Being Catholic has nothing to do with the matter. It's a false conclusion, even if the numbers are correct, because it assumes that being Catholic suggests that one is a criminal. Many things might suggest that someone is involved with crime, but merely that they are black is not one of them.

You still haven't answered my question: what does your point mean practically? Should black men be suspected of a crime because they are black? You can call it "emotional", but racial profiling has to take place in the real world. What are you proposing? A black man in a nice car is suspected of stealing that car because his skin is darker than yours? If Alan Keyes and Rick Santorum are driving the same car in the same neighborhood, and a cop sees them, should Alan Keyes be pulled over and Rick Santorum left free? DWI, DUI, and DWB (Driving While Black)?

If that is the case, then white men in public with a child should be suspected of being sex offenders.

[Anomaly]

Era,
You are making cause and effect judgements where there are none.

Read Soc's post again, keeping in mind that being black is just a physical trait, NOT a causitive attribute.

A higher per-capita % of white males being caught for sex-crimes is a physical trait identifying WHO is more likely to commit the crime. It has NOTHING to do with WHY. If I saw a white male walking in a mall with a crying boy, YES, i would give a second glance at them instead of a black guy. Not that the white guy would commit the crime because he's WHITE, but because of environment/social conditons, etc., the probablility is there. I'm not assuming he's guilty, just giving a second glance.

Now if I assumed he HAD to be guilty because he's WHITE, and confronted him rudely, making accusations, that's a different story. Or if I began confronting all the white males, making accusations because I believe white males are degenerate sexual predators, that's wrong.

Being black doesn't cause one to commit crimes. It's a physical trait that is shared in common with a sub-set of the population that are more likely to have suffered from environmental conditions that helped lead to choices made to commit crimes.

NOBODY, is trapped by genetics to commit crimes or act morally. NOBODY is trapped by environmental conditions to commit crimes or act morally. We ALL have the Free Will necessary to decide good OR bad. We are all imperfect and make imperfect choices and screw up. Being black, middle-eastern, white, asian, hispanic, are just physical traits that are proportionally shared by others who MAY share the same cultural influences and values.

[kujo]

So, have we decided to use racial profiling in airports?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1099805' date='Oct 24 2006, 07:47 AM']
You have not proven anything, except that people in poor areas commit more crime than people who are not in poor areas. It has nothing to do with whether they are black or not. To say "blacks are more likely to commit crime than whites", and then somehow use that to justify racial profiling, is a false argument, because race has nothing to do with the matter. If you want to say people in poor areas, irrespective of race, should be profiled, then that would flow logically from the point you are making. Poverty has something to do with crime. The color of your skin does not. It's like saying "Catholics commit more crimes per capita than Protestants, therefore, Catholics should be profiled and suspected of a crime". Being Catholic has nothing to do with the matter. It's a false conclusion, even if the numbers are correct, because it assumes that being Catholic suggests that one is a criminal. Many things might suggest that someone is involved with crime, but merely that they are black is not one of them.

You still haven't answered my question: what does your point mean practically? Should black men be suspected of a crime because they are black? You can call it "emotional", but racial profiling has to take place in the real world. What are you proposing? A black man in a nice car is suspected of stealing that car because his skin is darker than yours? If Alan Keyes and Rick Santorum are driving the same car in the same neighborhood, and a cop sees them, should Alan Keyes be pulled over and Rick Santorum left free? DWI, DUI, and DWB (Driving While Black)?

If that is the case, then white men in public with a child should be suspected of being sex offenders.
[/quote]
Basically, what Anomaly said. It doesn't look like you're really reading my posts, but instead reading into them what you want, and thus missing the point.

I posted a fact, you asked for evidence to support my statement, which I provided, and then you act as though I am saying that being black somehow in itself causes crime.
I'd strongly suggest reading this report: [url="http://www.amren.com/color.pdf"]The Color of Crime[/url], which uses data from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice, and the FBI. Read it carefully, and then come back when you're done.

Cops cannot know immediately what neighborhood, background, etc. someone comes from, but he can see race, among other things (which is why this becomes an issue). Race is only one part of police "profiling." Sex, age, and general appearance also come into play. Obviously, a young black man dressed in a "gangsta" style is going to be more likely to be suspect by a cop than a prim, middle-aged lady.
And Alan Keyes under normal circumstances would be unlikely to be pulled over. A 20 year old "gangsta"-styled dude (of any race) will attract more attention than a respectable looking 60-year-old black man in a conservative suit. And I doubt very many black grannies, for instance, get stopped by the police.
Simply being young and male will make you the object of more police attention than being old or female. Not that this is fair, but it's the way it works. Cops are human, and must go by physical appearances like everyone else.

Of course simple harrasment by police where there is absolutely no reason for suspicion of crime is wrong, whatever the race, and I am not defending everything done by any cop. But sometimes cops have to "play a hunch" in order to uncover crime.

How would a policy [i]against[/i] "racial profiling" work? Would cops have to fill an equal quota for race of everyone they stop? That would be ludicrous, and would lead to a great reduction in the effectiveness of crime fighting.
Political correctness simply does not work in the real world.

Spend a few years working in law enforcement, and I might take what you have to say a bit more seriously.

Edited October 25, 2006 by Socrates

[Era Might]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1100508' date='Oct 24 2006, 09:55 PM']How would a policy [i]against[/i] "racial profiling" work? Would cops have to fill an equal quota for race of everyone they stop?[/quote]
Easy. Nobody is suspected of anything because of the color of their skin. If a black man is riding down the street, he is not to be suspected of stealing cars. If a white man is in a car with his daughter, he is not to be suspected of abducting her.

"Racial profiling" is something entirely different from "including race in a profile". Racial profiling is the targeting of someone because they are a particular race, and nothing more. If a black man is riding a car, then he should be pulled over because he's a black man, and all black men are suspicious; as opposed to the police are looking for a middle aged black man in a Chevy truck, and they see a middle aged black man in a Chevy truck.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1100808' date='Oct 25 2006, 10:46 AM']
Easy. Nobody is suspected of anything because of the color of their skin. If a black man is riding down the street, he is not to be suspected of stealing cars. If a white man is in a car with his daughter, he is not to be suspected of abducting her.

"Racial profiling" is something entirely different from "including race in a profile". Racial profiling is the targeting of someone because they are a particular race, and nothing more. If a black man is riding a car, then he should be pulled over because he's a black man, and all black men are suspicious; as opposed to the police are looking for a middle aged black man in a Chevy truck, and they see a middle aged black man in a Chevy truck.
[/quote]That's not what racial profiling is. Racial profiling is the application of using statistics to choose who to stop, search, and question in a set circumstance. In this case, we are talking about using racial profiling on who to stop, search, and question of the people boarding airlines. You are mischaracterizing what racial profiling is and how it is used. Racial profiling is questioning 80% of the middle eastern men and 20% of the rest of the population so that effectively, you can question X number of persons boarding planes with the personnel you have available. We aren't talking about traffic stops.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1100808' date='Oct 25 2006, 10:46 AM']
Easy. Nobody is suspected of anything because of the color of their skin. If a black man is riding down the street, he is not to be suspected of stealing cars. If a white man is in a car with his daughter, he is not to be suspected of abducting her.

"Racial profiling" is something entirely different from "including race in a profile". Racial profiling is the targeting of someone because they are a particular race, and nothing more. If a black man is riding a car, then he should be pulled over because he's a black man, and all black men are suspicious; as opposed to the police are looking for a middle aged black man in a Chevy truck, and they see a middle aged black man in a Chevy truck.
[/quote]
I'm sure absolutely no one would argue for "racial profiling" as you define it.
Cops simply harrassing people purely for its own sake is wrong, no matter what race the person is.
But if there is actual or suspected crime involved, this becomes a different matter.

But I'm sure no police department has an official policy of pulling over people soley because they're black. If so charged, most cops would probably say they had some other reason to be suspicious of the person.

Such cases of alleged "racial profiling" would have to be tried on a case-by-case basis.

I think in actual practice, this isn't always so black-and-white (no pun intended) as you make it to be.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1101244' date='Oct 25 2006, 09:19 PM']
I'm sure absolutely no one would argue for "racial profiling" as you define it.
[/quote]
Well, yeah, most people won't argue for it. That doesn't mean, however, that it isn't the de facto rule in many jurisdictions, even if it isn't spelled out.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Sojourner' post='1101426' date='Oct 26 2006, 08:25 AM']
Well, yeah, most people won't argue for it. That doesn't mean, however, that it isn't the de facto rule in many jurisdictions, even if it isn't spelled out.
[/quote]Do you have any evidence to support that accusation? There is the burden of reasonableness. We don't live in some sort of 'Utopia' that we can ever come up with a perfect law and a perfect law enforcement organization. It isn't constructive to throw in gut feelings and emotional suppositions into this difficult question.

Again, let's look at the practical application(s) we are talking about, such as analyzing people boarding planes as a matter of security.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1101438' date='Oct 26 2006, 09:16 AM']
Do you have any evidence to support that accusation? There is the burden of reasonableness. We don't live in some sort of 'Utopia' that we can ever come up with a perfect law and a perfect law enforcement organization. It isn't constructive to throw in gut feelings and emotional suppositions into this difficult question.

Again, let's look at the practical application(s) we are talking about, such as analyzing people boarding planes as a matter of security.
[/quote]
My evidence is largely anecdotal, both from talking to cops and from talking to people who've been on the receiving end of profiling.

[Cam42]

Hi Abby, how are your flip flops?

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Sojourner' post='1101459' date='Oct 26 2006, 09:56 AM']
My evidence is largely anecdotal, both from talking to cops and from talking to people who've been on the receiving end of profiling.[/quote]Like anything the government touches, there will be bad exceptions. I believe that there will be persons who will abuse racial profiling. They are also the ones who are probably practicing it's abuse now.
But again, in the practical application screening persons boarding planes, screening persons entering the Country, etc., I still say it's worthy of discussion and should be utilized. I will throw in ancedotal evidence of my middle-eastern and black family members who support it, have had it applied (unfairly) to them, but believe it is worthwile in the broader scope.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Cam42' post='1101462' date='Oct 26 2006, 09:58 AM']
Hi Abby, how are your flip flops?
[/quote]


Not sure what you're referring to here ...

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1101483' date='Oct 26 2006, 10:39 AM']
Like anything the government touches, there will be bad exceptions. I believe that there will be persons who will abuse racial profiling. They are also the ones who are probably practicing it's abuse now.
But again, in the practical application screening persons boarding planes, screening persons entering the Country, etc., I still say it's worthy of discussion and should be utilized. I will throw in ancedotal evidence of my middle-eastern and black family members who support it, have had it applied (unfairly) to them, but believe it is worthwile in the broader scope.
[/quote]
My concerns about racial profiling, and profiling in general, are twofold. One, that profiles will be abused, and that innocent people will be unfairly harrassed or mistreated as a result. Two, that reliance on a particular profile blinds police and security personnel to non-conforming people who pose real threats.

I'm not saying that profiling can't be a valuable tool ... but it should be used carefully, with proper respect for its limitations.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Sojourner' post='1101494' date='Oct 26 2006, 11:01 AM']I'm not saying that profiling can't be a valuable tool ... but it should be used carefully, with proper respect for its limitations.
[/quote]I agree with this clear statement, but I didn't get that from your earlier posts.
We are talking about protecting the freedom to move about this Country. We have to think about the greater good, and of course, temper it with concern for those who may suffer from abuse. But concern for them must be tempered with a concern for the majority. Extreme opinions are worthwhile if we are willing to listen to both sides without automatically dismissing them, otherwise it's tyranny of the loudest or most politically savvy. The one squeaky wheel will get the entire waggon lubricated.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1101498' date='Oct 26 2006, 11:10 AM']
I agree with this clear statement, but I didn't get that from your earlier posts.
We are talking about protecting the freedom to move about this Country. We have to think about the greater good, and of course, temper it with concern for those who may suffer from abuse. But concern for them must be tempered with a concern for the majority. Extreme opinions are worthwhile if we are willing to listen to both sides without automatically dismissing them, otherwise it's tyranny of the loudest or most politically savvy. The one squeaky wheel will get the entire waggon lubricated.
[/quote]
Sorry ... I haven't taken as much time to formulate posts lately as I apparently should have been.

To further elaborate: while I think profiling can be valuable, in the arsenal of security weapons I don't think it's the strongest we have. And, I think it has some significant drawbacks that should make people leery of using it.

The potential for abuse is, I think, very high, and my personal belief is that it does happen more frequently than we would like to think. But, data on this subject is notoriously difficult to compile, because records from jurisdiction to jurisdiction are kept differently, and demonstrating abuse is dependent on agencies being forthcoming with records that may not portray themselves in favorable lights. Anecdotal evidence is also unreliable, I realize, but I have heard enough to create serious concerns about the viability of profiling as a common security/investigatory option.

If I were to analogize it to cooking ... I suppose I would say it's like chili pepper: indispensable to certain dishes, but not to be used as liberally as salt.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Sojourner' post='1101509' date='Oct 26 2006, 11:22 AM']If I were to analogize it to cooking ... I suppose I would say it's like chili pepper: indispensable to certain dishes, but not to be used as liberally as salt.[/quote]Exactly. Salt is used almost universally (I'm not a liberal), but when using chili pepper, people's tastes vary. At a certain level, it's subjective judgement, but at an extreme level, it because unacceptable to almost everyone.
I think that the entire security issues is one that is being run by subjective emotion. I traveled in England before 2001, and they effectively dealt with IRA with heightened security that Americans here would have a fit over. Currently, the US barely comes close to meet the security screening to board an airplane that was required to visit the London Towers. If emotional/ancedotal arguments are removed from racial profiling, then intelligent analysis can apply. Just like the NFL fought the pat-down searches to enter a stadium. People emotionally wanted 'something' to be done, but pat-down searches for 80,000 people entering a stadium are useless. Better to have the 'searchers' wandering the crowd observing people and watching the back hallways and by-ways. Who checks the vendors and delivery people? Here in Tampa, that was called racial profiling because 60% of them black while only 15% of the fans were black (unsupported statistics from an editorial).