Racial profiling

[jasJis]

What is racial profiling?

[dUSt]

I am prejudice against Mexican people who look like fat white people.

[polysoccer620]

I understand that a lot of people are extremely upset with racial profiling, or any other stereotypical attitude. But the reality is that many of those same people have an initial reaction which in fact is strictly because of a certain stereotype. As an example: There is a trip i was making to northern cali and a couple of rows infront of me sat who i sterotypically portrayed as a "religious extremist". That without any thought was my first instinct...as much as i hated it. I did not act on it of course but my point is that it was first raw reaction to a man of that profile.
Does anyone see how this initial stereotyping can truly be stopped? And just in my opinion i don't see racial profiling ever going away unless this initial thought process is!! Hope i didn't upset anyone.

[musturde]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Aug 9 2005, 05:03 AM']Ummmm.....I don't mean to be a sticky wicket here, but the Patriot Act wasn't a law until 45 days AFTER 9/11.  So it is impossible that it would have been a deterrant.

I agree that the blame shouldn't lie with President Bush, but you can't use the Patriot Act as a deterrant, when it didn't exist, yet.

[url="http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html"]H.R. 3162 RDS  (The Patriot Act)[/url] was passed 24 October 2001.
[right][snapback]678058[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
And had it existed, 9/11 might not have happened. Racial profiling is okay when a certain group of idiots all do the same thing.

[jasJis]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Aug 9 2005, 02:57 PM']What is racial profiling?
[right][snapback]678689[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]Nobody answered my question. What is racial profiling?

Is it giving attention to a certain demographic of people that logic and common sense it is a reasonable expenditure of limited resources to protect the greatest number of people.

Or

Is it using stereotypes in order to foster prejudicial behavior against a certain demographic of people BEYOND what is reasonble to protect the greatest number of people and becomes an affront against the freedom and respect for persons in society.

Two different things.

Reason tells us racial profiling is good and beneficial if it structured and organized and efforts are made to limit offenses. Racial profiling is bad if allowed to be mis-used to commit acts of revenge. Disallowing law enforcement personell to establish and exercise policies that logically apply resources to the most efficient use is harmful to all of society.

[Cam42]

[quote name='musturde' date='Aug 10 2005, 12:44 AM']And had it existed, 9/11 might not have happened. Racial profiling is okay when a certain group of idiots all do the same thing.
[right][snapback]679586[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Fine, but that is not what you said. You said:
[quote]In America we get all stressed over such issues like the Patriot Act and Racial Profiling but the truth is, the 9/11 incident most likely wouldnt have happened had those two been enforced.[/quote]

That assumes that the Patriot Act existed and was not enforced PRIOR to 9/11. That simply is not the case. Had you said the 9/11 incident most likely wouldn't have happened had those two been IN FORCE.

But you used it as a reason to defame the leadership of the country and cast blame.....no way.

[Cam42]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Aug 10 2005, 07:33 AM']Nobody answered my question.  What is racial profiling?

Is it giving attention to a certain demographic of people that logic and common sense it is a reasonable expenditure of limited resources to protect the greatest number of people.

Or

Is it using stereotypes in order to foster prejudicial behavior against a certain demographic of people BEYOND what is reasonble to protect the greatest number of people and becomes an affront against the freedom and respect for persons in society.

Two different things.

Reason tells us racial profiling is good and beneficial if it structured and organized and efforts are made to limit offenses.  Racial profiling is bad if allowed to be mis-used to commit acts of revenge.  Disallowing law enforcement personell to establish and exercise policies that logically apply resources to the most efficient use is harmful to all of society.
[right][snapback]679932[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

It is also illegal. [url="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.2074:"]H.R.2074[/url] and [url="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:S.989:"]S.989[/url]

Definition as explained by the US Senate Resolution S.989:
[quote]The term `racial profiling' means the practice of a law enforcement agent relying, to any degree, on race, ethnicity, or national origin in selecting which individuals to subject to routine investigatory activities, or in deciding upon the scope and substance of law enforcement activity following the initial routine investigatory activity, except that racial profiling does not include reliance on such criteria in combination with other identifying factors when the law enforcement agent is seeking to apprehend a specific suspect whose race, ethnicity, or national origin is part of the description of the suspect.[/quote]

[jasJis]

It may or may not be illegal. If it's presently illegal, prudential judgement indicates the law may have to be revisited. As far as legality goes, the following is part of H.R.2074:
[quote]SEC. 502. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of the provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.

SEC. 503. SAVINGS CLAUSE.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit legal or administrative remedies under section 1979 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1983), section 210401 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14141), the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.), and title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.).
.[/quote]I guess that's for the lawyers to figure out if it is unconstitutional to prevent the application of reasonable common sense to protect the public and if HR2074 limits the legal or administrative remedies under the other laws cited.

Edited August 10, 2005 by jasJis

[Cam42]

It's still illegal.

[jasJis]

Did you read my post, or do you just want to have the last word?

My post raised the question that we may need to change the law and raised the question how does racial profiling affect the other laws considering the higher likelihood of terror threats and the other laws.

We are also discussing the 'principle' of 'racial profiling', not just the current laws. We make the laws, we can change them.

[Carrie]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Aug 10 2005, 10:59 AM']Did you read my post, or do you just want to have the last word?

My post raised the question that we may need to change the law and raised the question how does racial profiling affect the other laws considering the higher likelihood of terror threats and the other laws.

We are also discussing the 'principle' of 'racial profiling', not just the current laws.  We make the laws, we can change them.
[right][snapback]680050[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
The question that needs to be asked is:

Do the benefits of racial profiling outweigh the loss of civil liberties in the name of national security?


I personally don't think so. I think allowing racial profiling in any sense is wrong.

[Cam42]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Aug 10 2005, 09:59 AM']Did you read my post, or do you just want to have the last word?

My post raised the question that we may need to change the law and raised the question how does racial profiling affect the other laws considering the higher likelihood of terror threats and the other laws.

We are also discussing the 'principle' of 'racial profiling', not just the current laws.  We make the laws, we can change them.
[right][snapback]680050[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I read the post. Was my post wrong?

[Cam42]

I am not looking for a fight with you jas....don't go looking for what is not there.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Aug 10 2005, 09:26 AM']I am not looking for a fight with you jas....don't go looking for what is not there.
[right][snapback]680084[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]Then why respond with 'It's still illegal'? Did I say it absolutely wasn't? I raised valid questions and suggested if it was currently illegal, then we should change the laws. Your response was thematically irrelevant to my post. You were responding to what wasn't there and I questioned you about it. Kick back and relax. I wasn't challenging your intelligence.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Aug 10 2005, 09:14 AM']The question that needs to be asked is:

Do the benefits of racial profiling outweigh the loss of civil liberties in the name of national security?
[right][snapback]680068[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]Excellent question. Societies always have a tension between individual liberties and group liberties. National security is security for the National Government. How about the security of the general populace to use Mass Transit with as little risk as possible? We have to sacrifice some individual freedoms for the betterment of the group. We are not only a group of individuals, but are organically connected and have to allow a certain amount of self-sacrifice for the benefit of the greater good. There can be tyranny of the minority just as there can be tyranny of the majority.