Racial Profiling a JOKE

Let me first say that I live in a city of high segregation. Crime rates are obviously, higher in the poorer parts of the city. Just yesterday, I was driving around a "ghetto", where me and my buddy heard a gunshot very close by. Instinct took over and we got out of their ASAP.

Now, a lot of people say the drug war is a joke. The current reason it is so big is because since drugs are illegal, the mass amounts of money circulating on the black market can not be taxed. On top of that, many would question if a nation on drugs could turn us backwards.

But, speaking of now, and the current laws, drugs are illegal. So with that said, on to my point.

www.ojp.gov...

As seen, blacks and other racial minorities are more likely to go to jail than other races (preferably white in this situation).

Also, by obvious reasons, hijackers of airplanes are going to have a higher chance of originating from the middle east.

Now, regarding crime rates, if an officer was in a ghetto, normally filled with blacks, how is it racial profiling to take a guess that there would be a person with drugs or weapons or a violent history, if STATISTICS show that they are more likely to have something?

I am not saying to randomly check every black or muslim and what not, but if there is any type of criminal activity comes to the cops mind, shouldn't he have the right to do a search? I will tell you one thing, in my city, the ghettos are just filled with violence and all sorts of criminal activity, where I could make an estimated 90% of it comes from blacks, if not more.

So why do cops get labeled as racists? Shouldn't statistics and plain eye sight be probable cause for such scenarios?

Another example would be if the authorities are searching for illegal immigrants, it would only be common sense to search in the Southern California, Texas area, etc, and look for Mexican oriented people?

I think I have provided enough examples to get my point across. By no means am I just saying for cops to search every minority, but given certain scenarios - don't you think it should be allowed?

Wow, I get what your saying....... but.

I can feel literally the flames coming from people who may very much disagree.

I don't racially profile, everyone is a bad person in my opinion. Hence if I was a cop I would pull everyone over who has pulse.

It's not called racial profiling, Its called STATISTICS! To all the people who use the race card... Get over it. It's not my fault that more blacks are in prison than whites. It's not my fault that more blacks decide to break the law than whites. It is what it is.

Exactly what I am saying!

Now, by no means do I support a "white" cop pulling over someone over only because of race...but it is obvious when drug trades and such are going down.

It is all about situation. If I was a cop and I saw some white guy scratching his neck vigorously, with pants below his pants and rashes all over, that would give me a reason to check it out.

Just like if a black guy has his pants down, walking in an alley at midnight, or talking to someone in a "secretive" location and such.

You failed to ask yourself why more blacks would be prone to comitting acts of violence and drug running.

It could be that they've been segregated and put down for hundreds of years and are offered no help by federal agencies.

Racial profiling is no joke.

Yes in your example, ofcourse police are going to keep an eye out for that if the primary race of people living in those parts of the city are of the minority that's just common sense.

But it takes more than a hunch to pull somebody over or have a search done. You need probable cause, whether you're white, black hispanic it does not matter.

Police are abusing this right with the minority because they can, because in some of these cities those people are still seen as being less than human in the eyes of some authorities. And yes they are subject to the biast opinions of such authority figures and the people who make the rules.

We are no different than any other race on the planet, blacks may be more involved in drugs and gun violence, but who starts the most wars in other countries? Who has abused virtually every minority on the planet?

The answer might surprise you.

Just like if a black guy has his pants down, walking in an alley at midnight, or talking to someone in a "secretive" location and such.

I'm sorry but that's not probable cause, you'd be abusing your rights as a police officer if you harrassed such a person for talking to somebody in an alley, as suspicious as they may look, you have no proof they were doing anything. What if a cop harassed you for walking home at 2am in your suburban neighboorhood because you were talking "secretively" to somebody else?


~Keeper

[edit on 3/8/2009 by tothetenthpower]

All I have to say here is that black, white, asian, hispanic, martian... it dont matter.. the constitution does not see color... the constitution does not see nor recognize statistics... the constitution sees an american for be an american citizen of this country in such applies those rights.

Now if a cop walks down a street looking for a criminal, it dont matter what color the individuals in place are, they have their rights of innocences until proven guilty. Thats what must be kept in mind. Dont matter if 99.99% of all crimes are done by a certain race... it is our duty as constitutionalists and patriotic americans to assure the rights of our fellow americans.

reply to post by FritosBBQTwist


If the day ever comes when New York police officers start questioning white businessmen outside Wall Street for the financial crimes they commit then I might agree with you.

But what's the chances of that ? None.

I will get back to you about blacks being oppressed.

The point of this thread is to argue whether or not racial profiling is okay. I for one agree that police have been abusing the whole probable cause scenario, and there are corrupt cops.

But, that is not the topic at hand.

My point is that minorities, are in A LOT more crimes than the majority. So, with that said, would you be opposed to increased police presence in areas with more minority groupings?

I am one who does not like to judge, but to compare. At my school, which is a fairly nice one, there are still a HEAP amount of white kids that are involved with drugs.

By making the comparison of that to even poorer kids, in even worse neighborhoods, where more blacks are present, and in rougher family situations, that those kids/adults would be FAR more prone to drug use and violence.

So what is wrong with doing a search (not a full raid, rip everything apart fiasco), on lets say a owner of a car that is more prone for drug dealing, or an area that is more prone for drug trades, by a race that is more prone to do so? That to me, is probable cause.

To deny that, is like saying (IMO)
"We both know I am doing something illegal, but you can't do anything about it!"

Now, with that said - to the comment regarding oppression. I am fully aware of the past and how that affects the present. But be realistic. That is part of the cause of this. I am not that naive. It would be like giving a dog 2 seconds to run from its cage before you shoot it. It isn't fair.

So, I see where you are coming from with that. But the whole environment with the drugs, violence, weapons, gang banging, etc, is only destroying their culture more.

I know that there is MUCH more to the problem than just catching criminals. The current system is a joke, and a drain on tax payers.

So, would you be for it if there wasn't "jail sentencing", but more of an education like program for those who get caught (and a fine)?

In reference to the attack of Pearl Harbor, Asians were rounded up. Now, the treatment of their property while they were prisoned was not fair, but since the country was practically in a state of emergency, it was done for the safe keeping of the country.

Compare that to this, except on a much lower scale.

There ARE areas with very high crime rates, and there SHOULD be something done about it. If I can not drive through a part of my city without hearing damn gun shots, that is quite sad.

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist
The point of this thread is to argue whether or not racial profiling is okay.

I dont have an issue and you would find most americans, non-white and white agree... racial profile is inevitable in police work... if a persons black well that will be the first line of description just like if he was white... that being said its the perks of the job and is inevitable. I dont see issue.

I for one agree that police have been abusing the whole probable cause scenario, and there are corrupt cops.

Then if you agree one would expect to see the flaws in this little theory of yours.

My point is that minorities, are in A LOT more crimes than the majority. So, with that said, would you be opposed to increased police presence in areas with more minority groupings?

No im sorry thats not an excuse for racially singling out a group, it is never the excuse. Guilty until proven innocence to all americans, black or white or any other race, no acceptions. Did you know blacks are more likely to be found guilty in the court of law as opposed to their white counterparts? Race is still an issue in this country, racial differences in income and work treatment are still different, the last thing we need for a slow healing nation is to add another difference in the way the police works with different ethnic groups.

I am one who does not like to judge, but to compare. At my school, which is a fairly nice one, there are still a HEAP amount of white kids that are involved with drugs.

Wonderful, you recognize issues in all races.. why on earth are you insisting otherwise? Are you confused?

By making the comparison of that to even poorer kids, in even worse neighborhoods, where more blacks are present, and in rougher family situations, that those kids/adults would be FAR more prone to drug use and violence.

And this is why by your account more police stations should be placed in those areas and this is why blacks whispering at night should be readily searched against their rights of innocence until proven guilty as opposed to their white counterparts?

So what is wrong with doing a search (not a full raid, rip everything apart fiasco), on lets say a owner of a car that is more prone for drug dealing, or an area that is more prone for drug trades, by a race that is more prone to do so? That to me, is probable cause.

I dont understand you, are you confused? So basically a black guy who looks suspicious should have his car searched yet the white or asian counterpart should be treated differently? Thats just BS and it does not uphold the constitution of the equality of all men as our founding fathers intended.

Now, with that said - to the comment regarding oppression. I am fully aware of the past and how that affects the present. But be realistic. That is part of the cause of this. I am not that naive. It would be like giving a dog 2 seconds to run from its cage before you shoot it. It isn't fair.

It is a fair analysis. Why should blacks be treated differently from whites under court of law or the constitution simply because their numbers are higher in poverty and jail as the result of years of mistreatment and segregation that will take decades more to heal?

Ill say this again. The constitution sees no color, it only sees an american.

I dont know where you got these excuses, but I suggest you start walking in the others shoes for once before you start advocating unequal treatment by the laws and the constitution of the land on certain americans.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by Southern Guardian

All I have to say here is that black, white, asian, hispanic, martian... it dont matter.. the constitution does not see color... the constitution does not see nor recognize statistics... the constitution sees an american for be an american citizen of this country in such applies those rights.

Nicely stated SG. That star is from me. See, i guess we do agree on some things!

Racial profiling is done btw. Just because someone may not think it exists by them...i've seen it.

I used to live out in the country...and i hate to say it...I know for a fact that some of the policemen their would pull over minorites...just because.

It does exist..unfortunately...along with racism, religious persecution, and sexism. I wish it didn't. The world seems to thrive on ignorance....and that ignorance is often taught.

I come from a small, affluent town with small-minded, affluent people.. Most of them are like you, they don't get it.

You see, the laws they break are never found out, because they live in their clean little bubble.

I now live in Philadelphia. I must admit, I became a racist the moment I moved here. But I've grown up since then. What I realized is that everything here is not done behind closed doors, mostly because they don't have the fancy houses we grew up in. Its all done in the street, and in broad daylight.

At that moment you realize the statistics don't tell the whole story.

Do a large proportion of violent crimes happen by minorities? Of course. But thats just the society at the moment. They grow up around it and adopt it into their own lives.

But, whites can get away with far worse and never even get a slap on the wrist.

Now, you wanna talk low income housing and welfare? Now thats where I become less progressive. But thats for another thread..

A friend of mine is Hispanic, shaved head, baggie clothes, backwards hat. Nice guy, clean record, has nothing to do with crime or gangs. He keeps getting pulled over and questioned. He would complain about this to me. I told him.... You look like a gang banger! Let your hair grow out, wear clothes that fit, straiten your hat and see what happens. Low and behold, no more cops. He lives in a "banger" neighborhood so naturally the law dogs would suspect him of banging to. Gang bangers look a certain way, I would say about 99% have the same look, However there are people who can look like a banger but in reality is a fine citizen but statistics show that that is rare. If you follow statistics somebody walking down the street with a shaved head,baggie pants,tattoos,wife beater shirt on, drinking some type of liquid from a paper bag is a banger or some type of shady character. Granted not all, but most.

When someone cries racial profiling, they don't just look at the group of people, say being arrested in this instance, and say, yes a lot of them are black.


They do take into consideration the population. What they look at is to see if the ratios are skewed.

For example, say there is a complaint from a town that black people get pulled over more then white people. They will look at the information from pull overs at night, where the officers can't see in the cars. If the percentage of day time pull overs of minorities is higher then the nighttime pullover of minorities, you have your answer.

Believe it or not, racial profiling still goes on quite a bit. And fire and police companies are some of the worst offenders, and not just in the south.

Now personally, sometimes stereotypes stand true. Sorry, and it goes for everyone. I hate to see anyone wrongfully attacked as much as the next person but some people just do goofy stuff.

As far as the inner cities go, stereotyping isn't the issue. People need to stop regarding inner cities as a cess pool and see it as a society that needs a hand.

People don't like living in constant crime or poverty. But it it the only way of life they know. It has been that way for generations. And just because someoen wants a better life doesn't mean they have the resources or the information to get it. As a friend of mine explained, someoen getting out of the problems of the city is as feasible as you buying the white house.
When you see your uncle getting arrested, your mother and older sisters getting pregnant at 15, and your older brothers dealing drugs. And this is how it is for every family, what are you expecting?

And these children are hurt. Their lives are constant fear. This friend is a psychologist for inner city children. Their childhoods are robbed from them.

it is not about rights or profiling or gangs. It is about people trapped in a vortex.And major influence and resources are needed to get them out. Just thinking they should want better isn't enough. the mind doesn't work that way. When a society has had a way of life for quite some time, it takes a major shift to get them too change.

I read an article once about a program that helped get young gangsters off the street. And it followed this young man, who had been involved in gang activity since he was 9 years old. They had strict regulations regarding his activity(also kind of a guinea pig too to see if this works) and they gave him opportunities that he normally would not of had.
They helped him finish school. they helped him get a job, and even get a credit card.

He eventually got a nice place not in the "hood."
but he talked about how hard it was to get rid of those old gang feelins. It was sad the way he described it, like growing up in gorilla warfare. He had to resist the urge to duck into doorways and hide behind objects for fear of beign shot. Like someone just coming out of 'Nam.

I felt so sad for him. He was only 17.

He said it was incredibly hard, just working. And certainly not getting the same amount of money that he got from selling or theft.

But he admitted there was a lot more pride in getting a pay check too. There was actually something showing for his work. And he paid off his credit card. He was one of the success stories. Not all did this well but they figure even getting one child off the street is successful.

I don't think racial profiling exists.

I think cultural profiling exists, and that's a good thing.

Picture this:

You're a cop driving down the street, looking to investigate local drug gang involvement. Are you gonna stop:

a. the black man wearing baggy jeans, gold chain and a red bandana

b. the white man wearing baggy jeans, gold chain and a blue bandana

c. the white man wearing a suit and holding a briefcase

d. the black man wearing a suit and holding a briefcase

I would say, 99% of the time, respondents would choose either a or b. Its not the race that makes the difference, its the attire and appearance. The driving factor behind who to search is not ethnicity, colour or race- its appearance and behaviour.

Now what happens is that the majority of black men fall into category A rather than category D. This is why cultural/ appearance profiling is confused with racial profiling.

A prominent Army Colonel once told me "its not racial profiling, its pattern recognition--" He explained that there is no room for political correctness when it comes to saving lives. I don't agree with all of what the man said-- but that statement, sounds about right.

Let me first say that I live in a city of high segregation. Crime rates are obviously, higher in the poorer parts of the city. Just yesterday, I was driving around a "ghetto", where me and my buddy heard a gunshot very close by. Instinct took over and we got out of their ASAP.

I used to live an area like this several times. Every night we would sit on the porch and name that gunshot. it is not so bad.
We even would wave to the drug dealers because we saw them standing outside the conveinance store everyday. And my friend had a big huge green honkey truck, with cb antennaes. He stood out a little.
It really isn't so bad. And this is one of the worst criminal areas in the country.

As seen, blacks and other racial minorities are more likely to go to jail than other races (preferably white in this situation).
Also, by obvious reasons, hijackers of airplanes are going to have a higher chance of originating from the middle east.

I think that several of our bombers in recent history have been white. So I would beg to differ on this. Besides, this are political crimes, and people can be bought. I think profiling terrorism is stupid.

Now, regarding crime rates, if an officer was in a ghetto, normally filled with blacks, how is it racial profiling to take a guess that there would be a person with drugs or weapons or a violent history, if STATISTICS show that they are more likely to have something?

It is racially profiling to illegally aprehend someone and/or search them without a just cause. Just because they fit a profile. There had to be a reason. Or a silly reason is even made up just so someone can do this. We are not talking about someone of a minority being caught redhanded.

I am not saying to randomly check every black or muslim and what not, but if there is any type of criminal activity comes to the cops mind, shouldn't he have the right to do a search? I will tell you one thing, in my city, the ghettos are just filled with violence and all sorts of criminal activity, where I could make an estimated 90% of it comes from blacks, if not more.

that you can't know for sure. Or because of racial profiling, that is what you are lead to believe. When these cases are investigated, it it to see how skewed the arrests are. Despite crime or not, it is profiling to think that every black person in the city is a criminal. Period. Despite the statistics, there are many hardworking, caring people in the city. It is not fair to mistreat them because of others.

Another example would be if the authorities are searching for illegal immigrants, it would only be common sense to search in the Southern California, Texas area, etc, and look for Mexican oriented people?

Actually, the largest Hispanic community is in Conneticut. Virginia also has a large Hispanic community. This is why racial profiling is so dangerous, there are a lot of myths and mis-understandings.


Because only people of color tend to get a green card. There are quite a few illegal Canadians in the US as well. But since they can easily hide their accents, they are not looked for. There can also be illegal Irish, French, Dutch, Russian, etc.

But if someone has a European accent, do you think they get asked for their green card? No, they are assumed to be in compliance and here legally. That is where that profiling issue comes in. Only people that are not white get green carded.

I think I have provided enough examples to get my point across. By no means am I just saying for cops to search every minority, but given certain scenarios - don't you think it should be allowed?

No. Then you are erroding civil liberties. And a high incidence of crime is no reason to erode civil liberties.
You have to tackle the source of the problem. Broken families. lack of mental health care, lack of resources. Terrible education. Job opportunities.

You are just looking at the symptoms, instead of solving the problem. Poverty creates crime.

Many of these kids join gangs simply because their own families are non existant. They look for a sense of community, and people that wil protect them, set rules and guidelines, no matter how twisted they may seem. it is human nature. We are pack animals, and we feel lost without our own packs.

People complain about the welfare system but one of the major problems about the welfare system is the lack of decent subsidized childcare. No one can go to work or school if they do not have affordable childcare. Childcare is expensive and not easy to find.

I think my point came across a bit differently than what I attended - especially with my horrible wording.

In one of my posts, I suggested that if someone was arrested, a fine and education class would be instilled, not a fine and jail time. Many neighborhoods do need help. My intentions are not to toss minorities in jail but to sweep the aspiring drug lords of the streets and teach them there is more to life than the "gang banging".

My original post was wrong on the points I stated and I admit that confusion was a bit of the problem. I didn't really know how to express myself.

If I could restate my whole post, I would rather say that there should be increased help in the rougher areas of cities and education classes for first time offenders. ALL people should be watched closely by law enforcement, and when whoever breaks a crime or even if there is suspicion, should be searched.

Instead of going to jail, there needs to be a boot camp type place. Jail is only a progression of crime and MOST of the time, criminals learn no real values there. I started the thread with a big stereotype, and realize that without any probable cause - it would just be horrible. To reinforce what I wished I had said though, ghettos do need a cleaning. While I am not such a big supporter of welfare with bare regulating, I AM for educating. Our goal should be to sweep kids and adults that are doing illegal activities and teach them real values if possible. I made the comment about racial profiling just based off the majority of the peoples races' that lived in harsh environments.

BUT, not to go 100% back on my statement, my initial goal was not to just throw them in jail, but to find the ones that need help.

edit - Apologies for my original post coming off completely ignorant!

[edit on 9-3-2009 by FritosBBQTwist]

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
You're a cop driving down the street, looking to investigate local drug gang involvement. Are you gonna stop:

a. the black man wearing baggy jeans, gold chain and a red bandana

b. the white man wearing baggy jeans, gold chain and a blue bandana

c. the white man wearing a suit and holding a briefcase

d. the black man wearing a suit and holding a briefcase

I would say, 99% of the time, respondents would choose either a or b. Its not the race that makes the difference, its the attire and appearance. The driving factor behind who to search is not ethnicity, colour or race- its appearance and behaviour.

If you're in a predominantly-black ghetto, then smart money would be on the white guy in a business suit and holding a briefcase. There's a good chance that he's either higher on the totem pole, or that he just bought a lot of blow. The second option would be the black man wearing a suit and holding a briefcase.

It's a "which seems out of place...?" thing.

I get somewhat what you are saying...somewhat, I know you are not trying to be racist or anything.

But I'm also assuming that you are not a black/hispanic/muslim male living in urban america. Racial profiling is no joke. It's real and cops, both state and feds, use it all over the country.

Let me tell you something about statistics: They suck! They never tell the whole truth. The reason why more hispanics or black other racial ethnicity have higher crime rates is because they are targeted more than whites. Wheres the statistic for that?
Sure, the cops or feds will deny any profiling or wrong doing and blah blah blah, but they also denied and got away with any wrong doing in the rodney king case.

And no I dont think racial profiling should be allowed, under any circumstance. It's bull#, yet its still used and sometimes justified, however silly or outrageous the reason. Racial profiling has a direct impact on our rights and liberties and therefore should not, must not be allowed.

[edit on 24-6-2009 by thereaintnospoon]