Racial Profiling.... good or bad?

Can you cite a source that shows that the majority of serial killers are white males and another source (or the same one, I’m not picky) that examines the race statistics of terrorists? And since terrorists in general is a huge scope, let’s look at terrorists in the US. I do not know what the results will be, but I would be concerned about falling victim to the stereotype that terrorists tend to be of a specific race instead of the facts of the matter.

Edited to add: While we’re at it, we’ll need to define terrorism to some working definition to see who falls into this group.

Before I start, note that “terrorists” are not brown guys with explosives taped to their torso. Terrorists are people who use terror as a weapon. Such as tanks, unmanned bombers, car bombs, and armies alike.

In my opinion… racial profiling is less legally offensive than morally offensive. As far as law goes, suspecting one person more than another based on the looks of them is not a civil rights violation. That is, unless the suspect is convicted without actually being guilty.

On the moral side, however, people who racially profile others are at risk, morally. I suppose it’s nothing that one can control, but it is not a good practice to become accustomed to.

If the police questioned every white male every time there was a murder, on suspicion that he might be a serial killer, you’d approximate the annoyance that Arab Americans and other brown folks deal with getting on a plane. I’ve never been questioned on suspicion of being a serial killer, and I doubt any of the other white males on this site have, either. If we were, I’m sure you’d feel differently about the idea of racial profiling.

To my knowledge, my police department has never used racial profiling for this purpose. racial profiling is only used to make sure police officers are not focusing on one group or gender of people in specific.

Each traffic stop requires only basic information for computer input. each filled form does not contain particular information on any one individual like their name, dob, or physical description.

I am wondering where your source of information is located for your question?

I think racial profiling in regards to the two examples of criminal that you gave is bad because the terms have been associated only with a certain race. Serial killers are mostly white males, well how do you define a serial killer? What about gang members who have killed multiple people? Well, they can be any color and of any ethnicity. Terrorists are mostly middle-eastern? Again, not true. Terrorists as have been traditionally defined in our society are middle-eastern, but no one encompasses the definition of terrorism to include for example people who shoot up abortion clinics. These shootings are definitely meant to terrify but these people who do it are not considered terrorists.

Also, something you have to remember is that when people use racial profiling, they are going by looks alone. Indians and Egyptians are also profiled as terrorists simply because they look Arab. In addition, people belonging to this racial group are often profiled for behaviors that any white person could do without fear of persecution. If I go into the store and buy a handgun, hey, it’s cool because I’m white. If someone of middle-eastern descent bought a handgun, well, that’s cause for racial profiling. Even if the behavior is non-violent or has nothing to do with violence, such as buying fertilizer which is a component in some home made bombs then racial profiling can still come into play.

Perhaps they should “profile” every white guy driving a vintage Mercedes for possible tax evasion~.

@john65pennington I stand corrected. I have no sources. I have only what has been drilled into my brain by the media growing up. Every serial killer I know of, has been white. However, after doing some research there really hasn’t been any true definition of a serial killer, other than extensive media coverage. I am the first to admit that I am wrong. So, I am wrong. :)

@everyone Since the examples I have come up with are limited, can you think of a reason that racial profiling should be used?

You might find this interesting:

According to Israelis, the secret to their successful airport security is not labor-intensive checkpoints, but a screening system that is frowned upon in many other countries: ethnic profiling.

You’re right. Serial killers are predominantly white males, making up around 72% of all serial killers. Blacks trail far behind, at 22%. The primary differences in white male serial killers is whether they fall into the 23–35 age group, or 35–55 and whether they raped their victim. 89% grew up with their original parents; they were not adopted. Only 38% of the aforementioned 89% came from disturbed homes. The average first kill age is 28.

Racial profiling works only when the officers and detectives doing their jobs are not racists.

It is a necessary evil.

Mowens. thanks for the comeback. my department has been racial profiling for at least 8 years. the only questions asked on the profiling form is location, date, time, gender, race and whether or not they live in my county. thats it. as you can see, this form and its information is not aimed at any specific criminal activity. the information requested is very broad and never lists a name, dob, address or any other specific information. there is no way you could determine if a stopped traffic violator is anything, based on our racial profiling reports. racial profiling is a necessity and i agree with its use. this prevents police officers from singling out one individual class of people as a target for traffic enforcement. other states do not have racial profiling and its evident that they should have one form in place. their lawsutis have proven this. again, thanks for the comeback. my police department is an accredited police department and we follow the local, state and federal laws to the letter. john

It’s a good thing nobody bothered answering with hard figures. Whew! What an inconvenience THAT would have been.Geeeeeeez.

@phillis You did. :)

@john65pennington When are the these forms filled out? When they are booked?

@mowens There are excellent links all over the internet. I would have been happy to post them, but don’t know how to do it per Floofer standards. I knew you were right about serial killers being predominantly white male. I found graphs that broke down the stats in every way imaginable.

First, some degree of what might be called “racial profiling” is rational given actual statistical differences. Walter Williams wrote an article entitled “The Intelligent Bayesian” in which he notes that in a world with incomplete information we are forced to make guesses in some situations based on statistics. Imagine, for example, that you’re offered a prize if you can pick a winning basketball team. You can select from 10 players, 5 of which are black and 5 of which are white. Which 5 players would you select? You’d be entirely justified in picking the black players, because statistically you’d be maximizing your odds at winning. Is that racial profiling? Is it racial profiling to be more guarded when you walk past a black man at night in a bad neighborhood than a white man? It’s naive to advocate ignoring such factors, or to expect that people actually will.

Second, probably the best predictor of one’s status in life is that of their parents. Given a historically disadvantaged position in society, minorities are more likely to exhibit all the traits that arise from that disadvantage. They are more likely to lack values of advantaged members of society, to receive good education, and are more susceptible to committing crimes.

Given the first and second observation, and a history of racial oppression, racial profiling is likely to be persistent in a society long after systematic oppression is removed. That racial profiling is likely to slow progress among a minority in achieving equality. Furthermore, there may be some inherent tendency to groupism among a population—some people may be drawn to dislike or discriminate against those unlike themselves. If this is so then simply being a part of a minority may be an inherent disadvantage.

How to remedy the situation is a very difficult question. Is a “race” a cognizable ethical entity? Is an injustice done to a race more than just an injustice done to a set of individuals? If the answer to such questions is no, then perhaps we should do nothing. Perhaps economic disadvantage has been passed through generations, and minorities simply haven’t caught up yet. If this is the case, it’s not clear that a black kid born poor should be compensated more than a white kid. Beyond this, though, there does seem to be a persistent disadvantage to being a minority beyond any inherited economic factors, due to racial profiling. To what degree does society owe its citizens a fair opportunity to succeed. If citizens are owed a fair opportunity to succeed, then is it necessary to correct against racial disadvantage by offering some sort of counterbalancing advantage (like affirmative action)?

All that really needs to be said is this: While most serial killers have turned out to be white men, that doesn’t mean that serial killers are ever only white men.

The same can be applied to anything and everything you can think of in which police implement profiling. The biggest reason that profiling is more negative than positive is because it doesn’t always work. The reason it doesn’t always work is because profiling is far from being foolproof. How do I know this? I’ve seen the reports on profiling that police are now required to submit by law, in most places. Implementing profiling (which is both allowed and disallowed, depending on the state) has been proven to be inaccurate, and highly inaccurate in most places. So… why does all of this really matter?

Because when police use profiling to catch “bad guys”, they’re looking at superficialities, which means when they’re going after someone because of what they look like, they’re possibly ignoring tangible evidence, real clues, that would point to the actual bad guy. Another reason profiling is bad is because it makes police (and whoever else uses it) extremely lazy. Profiling makes it unnecessary to use the analytical skills that every person has – and has for a reason. When police get lazy, bad things happen that could have otherwise been avoided, had profiling never been relied upon, from the very beginning.

None of that is even mentioning the other reasons profiling is bad on an overall societal level. I can not recommend enough that people take some kind of anthropology class, even if you’re out of school and you want to take one just for one. It is very eye-opening.

I don’t want investigators to be stuck in a paradigm, but it is a good idea to look at certain characteristics of whoever you are looking for.
Not all muslims are terrorists. Not even one in a hundred. However, if you are looking for a terrorist, looking for muslims is a beginning.
Remember the Atlanta Child Murderer? The police took a long time trying to find him, because they were sure he was white. He wasn’t. They got stuck in a paradigm.

http://www.randomfunnypicture.com/pictures/456racism.jpg

Like I’ve said before, I’d rather a muslim get a little whiney that he was profiled than a plane crash into another building and kill thousands of people. I think it’s not necessarily a bad thing.

But on the same topic, I don’t think that the forces should let their guard down to everyone else who doesn’t “fit the bill”

I don’t know what’s going on in Ireland right now, but wasn’t that years long war of sorts that they had going on terrorism?

@ john65pennington This is interesting. If your form is the same as the one I have to use, it lists “white, black, Asian, Hispanic, American Indian, and maybe a few others, but not Middle Eastern descent. But where DO you put someone from Middle Eastern descent into a list like that? We didn’t have a clue, so my boss finally shrugged her shoulders, and labeled them “white”. Ha ha ha!

Suppose 1% of race A are criminals and 3% of race B are criminals. That means the chances of a given member of race B being a criminal are 3 times greater than for race A. Does this justify automatically arresting any member of race B who happens to be near the scene of a crime? No, because 97% of race B is law abiding. I don’t know what the actual percentages are, but even in this extreme case racial profiling is unjustified.