Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Do you support racial profiling?
Yes
73%
 73%  [ 17 ]
No
26%
 26%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 23

Author Message
jw





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 90
Reputation: 14.5

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If terrorism were anywhere near the top of the list of threats of non-medical death ... then I might go for racial profiling. The thing is, terror is not even in the top twenty list for non-medical causes of death, it's barely in the top fifty! Any large province or state losses more people to accidental death on any given long weekend than we do to terror. Industrial accidents kill one hell of a lot more MEN than terror kills men, women and children.

Now, you might well argue that terror --if we leave it alone-- would rise in death count and become a major cause of non-medical death. You MAY, maybe, have a point. The thing in opposition to your point is that words stop terror far better than police checks.

In other words ... I see no reason, as of yet, to use racial profiling: That is for true emergencies. Targeting young and disenfranchised Muslim men, giving them a reason to feel included, would be a lot more effective.

jw
palomino_pony





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 539
Reputation: 93.9Reputation: 93.9
votes: 3
Location: Lower Mainland, BC

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
You perform a search of every white person driving a Ford Taurus. The same if it was black or hispanic. I'm not sure what your point here is. You have two pieces of information here - the colour of skin (racial profiling) and the car. You have just proven my point.


My point is that you don't just investigate white people (racial profiling), you investigate people white people driving red Tauruses (profiling).

Quote:
So because white people also commit acts of terrorism we should exclude race from the equation? Every situation is unique and just because racial profiling might not be effective in certain situations doesn't mean it isn't effective in all situations.


Ah, white people are capable of committing acts of terrorism as well. Does it not then make sense that things like additional security measures at airports should apply to all people, regardless of race? If race alone is not a determinant of one's propensity towards committing terrorist acts, we should not rely solely on it when determining security policies.

FF_Canuck makes a good point in earlier post about this.
Quote:
I don't think racial profiling is the right word for what I support. I support general profiling which, among other things, includes:

- behaviours
- body language
- country/region of origin
- culture of origin
- odd travel patterns


I think we are splitting hairs here. I fully appreciate the use of race when investigating an act of crime if you have a positive ID. I have no problem having a Mosque put under surveillance if suspected terrorists attend, just like I have no problem with police surveillance of a suspected crack house. However, things like security measures at the airport, where you are trying to prevent a crime from happening in the first place, should not be biased to only one segment of society, especially if anybody could be a terrorist.

One final story about my trip to the Middle East, I had a very difficult time entering Israel. I was crossing the border on foot from Jordan. My friend whom I was travelling with went through the metal detector no problem. I had to pass through it 5 or 6 times, removing an article of clothing each time, starting with my belt and shoes. By time I was finished, I was literally only in my boxer shorts. Thankfully I did not set off the metal detector again! It felt like a strange version of strip poker. All my clothes had to pass through the x-ray machine one at a time and also get wanded.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palomino_pony wrote:
Craig wrote:
You perform a search of every white person driving a Ford Taurus. The same if it was black or hispanic. I'm not sure what your point here is. You have two pieces of information here - the colour of skin (racial profiling) and the car. You have just proven my point.


My point is that you don't just investigate white people (racial profiling), you investigate people white people driving red Tauruses (profiling).


Exactly, you do both. I'm not sure why this conversation is continuing. Above, you agreed that there is a place for racial profiling when combined with other techniques. We agree.

Quote:
Ah, white people are capable of committing acts of terrorism as well. Does it not then make sense that things like additional security measures at airports should apply to all people, regardless of race?


No. Threats vary with time and location. There would be no sense doing any sort of profiling if threats were constant.


Quote:
If race alone is not a determinant of one's propensity towards committing terrorist acts, we should not rely solely on it when determining security policies


But it is. At this point in time there is a greater chance of an airplane being hijacked by an arab than by a white man.

Quote:
I think we are splitting hairs here. I fully appreciate the use of race when investigating an act of crime if you have a positive ID.


That is not profiling. If you have a positive ID there is no need for ANY type of profiling because you know who it is. Profiling is used to narrow down the suspect pool using statistical methods.

Quote:
I have no problem having a Mosque put under surveillance if suspected terrorists attend


Why? Because muslims have a greater likelihood of being "suspected terrorists"? You used the term "suspected" here which means you don't have a positive ID as you stated above. So you are using religion as part of your profile. Should we not put an equal number of churches under surveillance so that we aren't bigots?

Quote:
However, things like security measures at the airport, where you are trying to prevent a crime from happening in the first place, should not be biased to only one segment of society, especially if anybody could be a terrorist.


It might be hard for a politically correct person like yourself to swallow but arabs have a higher likelihood of being a terrorist on an airplane.

Quote:
One final story about my trip to the Middle East, I had a very difficult time entering Israel. I was crossing the border on foot from Jordan. My friend whom I was travelling with went through the metal detector no problem. I had to pass through it 5 or 6 times, removing an article of clothing each time, starting with my belt and shoes. By time I was finished, I was literally only in my boxer shorts. Thankfully I did not set off the metal detector again! It felt like a strange version of strip poker. All my clothes had to pass through the x-ray machine one at a time and also get wanded.


I guess they have their fair share of politically correct people making poor decisions in order to not offend certain groups of people.
palomino_pony





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 539
Reputation: 93.9Reputation: 93.9
votes: 3
Location: Lower Mainland, BC

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
It might be hard for a politically correct person like yourself to swallow but arabs have a higher likelihood of being a terrorist on an airplane.


Those who know me would laugh at a comment like this. You really don't know anything about me to make a judgement like that. I said in an earlier post that I did not have a lot time for political correctness.

Yes, in today's climate, it is more likely that a terrorist would be Arab, but I am not willing to ignore everybody else who is not an Arab when I board a plane. I fly about twice a month for work and I feel safe knowing that everybody had to go through security.

I think it is time to let this thread die.

I re-read my last post, and realize that I left out the reason why I had to go through the metal detector multiple times. It was because I kept setting it off, not because of some Israeli security personal was getting all PC. ( I don't think that Israelis would let a thing like political correctness get in the way of keeping their country safe, do you?) I was down to undershirt and boxer shorts, and it still went off. Once I took off the undershirt, I was able to make it through without setting it off.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Racial Profiling has its place -

Responsible use, like anything else is not wrong.

I am reminded of a provincial offences course I had, taught by a police officer. He was discussing racial profiling(it was a hot button issue at the time because of the toronto racism probe). He said that sometimes you need to profile - not just on race, but on age, on facial features. Things like tatoos, clothing. Mannerisms.

We spend our entire lives profiling. If you're in Harlem, walking the streets, your profiling based on race could very well be what gets you out alive. You make determinations based on many key factors, and race is seldomly the only factor. Profiling and pre-judging are two separate things. You can profile a group, which means you may keep a closer eye on them, but you don't jump to conclusions(or lay charges in this case) before having evidentiary support.

I profile the little "thug-masters" i see walking aroudn all the time - I certainly wouldn't hire one. I don't trust them as much as I would someone dressed more conservatively. this may not prove to be accurate at all times - but it certainly is a good deal of the time.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So called "racial profiling" is an expression which was invented by hack journalists and seized upon by bottom-feeding lawyers (or vice versa) and repeated to the point that it's become common vernacular. Use of the expression "racial profiling" simply betrays a lack of understanding of the purpose and methodology of criminal profiling.

Criminal profiling is taking a wide variety of factors about a specific offence where no specific suspect has been identified and using those factors as a filter to eliminate or to highlight possible suspects and/or avenues of investigation. If a specific suspect exists, the investigation is simply that- an investigation. Profiling is only used when other avenues of investigation are either exhausted or unfruitful.

There isn't an investigator worth his/her salt who uses ethnicity as the only factor when profiling for suspects. Race or ethnicity represents a single factor in a wide group of factors. Likewise, eliminating using race or ethnicity as a factor makes no sense either.

-Mac
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
There isn't an investigator worth his/her salt who uses ethnicity as the only factor when profiling for suspects. Race or ethnicity represents a single factor in a wide group of factors. Likewise, eliminating using race or ethnicity as a factor makes no sense either.


Exactly, when I ask the question about the effectiveness of racial profiling I'm assuming that everyone understands that race is merely part of the profile and certainly isn't always part of the profile. The distinction appears to be this. There are people who think race is never a valid piece of the profile (it never adds value) and there are people who think that race should never be part of the profile (for politically correct reasons). I believe that the latter are also the type of people who oppose torture and force our troops to adhere to a different set of rules of engagement. It allows them to win political victories and feel morally superior to our enemies while at the same time putting OTHER people in danger. Same thing here. Win a political victory while claiming moral superiority - but at the same time lessening the safety of others.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are some situations where race or ethnicity as one of a multitude of factors is effective but others where it won't. To discard adding ethnicity for political reasons is ridiculous and asinine, especially since profiling is only a filtering process and is never conclusive.

Profiling, in and of itself, does not provide evidence for court. Collection of evidence is NOT part of profiling. All it does is provide direction for the investigation through analysis of evidence and comparison to other similar offences and the culprit(s) who committed them.

It's that comparison which can lead profilers astray. For instance, the so-called DC Sniper was initially profiled as being a maladjusted white male etc etc... when it turned out to be two black males (John Allan Mohammad & teenager John Lee Malvo) working in unison. In other words, ethnicity was used in that profile but it was in err. That did not prevent the investigation from moving forward and, as further evidence was collected and analyzed, they realized it wasn't a single shooter and things started falling into place.

So if our goal is preventing an act of terrorism and we're using profiling to identify groups or individuals to investigate, using race as one of the factors makes sense but in order to further the investigation, there has to be other, more specific factors directly related to the individuals or groups.

-Mac
shlemazl





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 10
Reputation: 32Reputation: 32Reputation: 32
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Racial profiling does not work in airports.

A number of Islamic terrorists have been anglosaxon converts into Islam. The majority of world Muslims aren't Arabs. If the terrorists know what we are looking for, they will change their image. It's easy to shave a beard and dress in a suite. It's easy to find a white convert to Islam.

Having said this, to find intelligence, security services have to focus on Mosques and Islamic organizations rather than on bookstores in Little Italy. If that is "racial profiling" than I am for it.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

shlemazl wrote:
A number of Islamic terrorists have been anglosaxon converts into Islam


A number? Could you describe the number? Is it a big number or a small number? Because profiling is a statistical art and just because "a number" of anglo-saxons have converted does not mean racial profiling does not work.

Quote:
The majority of world Muslims aren't Arabs


Nope. But more of the ones blowing themselves up are.

Quote:
If the terrorists know what we are looking for, they will change their image


But will they change their race?

Quote:
It's easy to shave a beard and dress in a suite. It's easy to find a white convert to Islam.


It is easy to find a white convert who is willing to blow himself up? Ummm, I'm thinking no.

Shaved beard and dressed in a suit?



Quote:
Having said this, to find intelligence, security services have to focus on Mosques and Islamic organizations rather than on bookstores in Little Italy. If that is "racial profiling" than I am for it.


So instead of being racists we will be bigots.

I'll buy your argument that it is easier to expose schemes and find extremists using surveillance. But profiling (which includes race) does work. It isn't perfect but it helps.
cbasu





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 391
Reputation: 131.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 10:03 am    Post subject: Why "No"? Reply with quote

In the op-ed section of today's Washington Post, two Rand Corp. analysts provide a reasoned analysis of the "No" side.

In an Oct 11/06 WP op-ed entitled 'Racial Profiling Won't Stop Terror' Riley and Ridgeway wrote:
(excerpted) We'd be na´ve to think that terrorists won't follow the example of drug dealers and change their methods to circumvent a profile. Terrorists have, in fact, been doing this for years. To enter Israel for terror attacks, Hamas suicide bombers have disguised themselves as Israeli soldiers, Hasidic Jews and elderly people. Arab terrorists have dyed their hair blond to look like German tourists, and are known to be recruiting women, older people and converts to Islam to join terrorist ranks.

At a time when America needs Muslim support to combat terrorism, authorities need to consider the impact of profiling policies carefully. It is perfectly legitimate to subject travelers to additional inspection because of their passport and nationality, or because of their recent international travel indicated by passport stamps, or because of their behavior. But focusing only on young Muslim men will send a message to terrorists that they can evade detection by sending people who do not fit this profile on deadly missions.

When you see a grandmother being patted down in an airport security line, remember that grandma's frisking is necessary, in part so that we are not deluded into using stereotypes for security. Tighter security is a burden we must all bear, and despite wishful thinking there are few effective shortcuts.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

that's not really taking the "no" side though...

people misunderstand racial profiling.. It doesn't mean we ignore everyone else, we just scrutinize those groups more than we might otherwise. Of course, that doesn't mean that everyone else isn't subject to the same - just possibly less often.
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
One last question, if the Oklahoma City bombing happened in 2003 (ie post 9/11), do you only investigate Arab/Southeast Asians, or do you leave the possibility open that anybody, regardless of race, could be a terrorist?

___

So because white people also commit acts of terrorism we should exclude race from the equation? Every situation is unique and just because racial profiling might not be effective in certain situations doesn't mean it isn't effective in all situations.


The profile of a serial killer:

White
Male
Middle age

Profiling, including race, works which is why you don't see white men complaining about racism when the cops are looking for a serial killer.

Most of us understand that minor inconveniences serve the greater good.
Buddy Kat





Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 94
Reputation: 24.6Reputation: 24.6
votes: 1
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Racial profiling is real and yes the promoted terror threat at the moment targets muslims which seems to be an exclusive club.

If the promoted terror threat were neocons, the target would be caucasian people as is the case in other countries.

Key word promoted..as if the medical system which kills more people than terrorists do would be targeted. Or the polluter corporation or the crooked killer cops. Or government programs with ill intent.

The power of the media...can get you to profile and fear any race or group given an opportunity.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Buddy Kat wrote:
Racial profiling is real and yes the promoted terror threat at the moment targets muslims which seems to be an exclusive club.

If the promoted terror threat were neocons, the target would be caucasian people as is the case in other countries.

Key word promoted..as if the medical system which kills more people than terrorists do would be targeted. Or the polluter corporation or the crooked killer cops. Or government programs with ill intent.

The power of the media...can get you to profile and fear any race or group given an opportunity.


OK - Crooked killer cops!? come on man... Its called reality, become familiar with it.

Neocons - If by neocon's you mean new conservatives, then your point actually highlights how racial profiling is only part of the equation - I'm sure one day you'll realize that not all conservatives are white, and a growing number are not.(don't forget most muslims and asians disagree with gay marriage ;) )

Promoted terror threat - Yeah, with promotions like the london transit bombings, madrid bombings and 911, I can see how you would say its being "promoted".. again, reality... try it out sometime.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2

Goto page Previous  1, 2  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Do you support racial profiling?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB