Is racial profiling really a 'bad' thing that's happening in America or is that just another liberal myth?
110273
Racial profiling happens, but not on a large scale.  It is controversial, because it involves stereotyping.  Proponents would say that it helps reduce crime.  As a conservative, I would be as wary of that as I am about racial quotas (two wrongs don't make a right, and the best person should always get the job).
167606
Of course that is not true. Dissatisfied "blacks" who feel they are not getting "their fair share" of government subsidies have thrown the race card in order to bring attention to their political wants. I find nothing wrong with any group banding together to make real change in government and society but I find this type of political attack most distasteful as it is racist and does no justice to all the efforts of brave Americans who have worked so hard to promote equality. \nBillions of dollars are granted by Congress annually to all parts of America as emergency aid. Someone will always have a hand out saying somebody else got more than them. It's not the president's duty to completely rebuild every life and every home, that's what insurance is for.
190980
Racial profiling as in "be on the lookout for a black male, 25 to 30 years of age," is certainly a form of racial profiling; however, racial profiling per-se is not a fair nor a tool that is required by law enforcement.\nAs an example I will pose a hypothetical situation involving an African-American middle aged woman that has been found murdered. \nIt will be a justifiable opinion that the murderer may have been an African-American male for the reason that 'blacks tend to murder blacks' as middle aged whites tend to kill/rape/serial murder other whites who are mainly women but also children and other men.\nThese are general statistics that are used in homicide investigations and which are not necessarily biased either toward one race or another, but however do hold investigative value for the control of crime. \n\n“In Criminal Justice, the issue is not how to protect the offender from the arbitrariness of the state, but how to bring the state more effectively to the aid of the offender.” \n“The State is not a Behemoth to be chained and fettered, but an agent capable of fulfilling an ambitious program. Thus a policy that calls for the states’ exercise of discretionary authority in finely tuned responses is at its core Progressive.” [The Positivist School]; [p 65]\n\nIn concluding and in my opinion it is not a biased attitude that is applied in certain criminal circumstances by police investigations but rather a more positive and direct methodology that allows for a quicker solution to a crime and its future control for the better safety of our society.  Try to find out about investigative techniques and you will find that the objective towards the resolution of a crime must be free of personal bias and a respect afforded for the constituitional rights of the accused/person of interest.  Jose
232036
No, racism is a horrible thing. However, I do think in general, we live in a society where people judge others far more on surface appearances. It really is sad.
618377
Yes, they are making it worse, but they do not really care about ending racism.  For a lot of people, playing the race card is the way to get ahead because they are too lazy or too stupid to do it the hard way - working for it.  If racism were to truly end, then there would be no more NAAWP (National Association for the Advancement of White People) would have to be allowed, and some do not want either, because it would not benefit them.  If all racism were to end, then those not qualified for jobs would not get hired just to fill quotas.
161764
Well, there is no such thing as "reverse discrimination."  Discrimination is discrimination, no matter which race is doing it to which.  If you are personally upset because you feel as though someone is discriminating against you solely based on the color of your skin -- whatever that color might be -- you should speak out against it.  It is not considered a hate crime as long as the manner in which you are speaking out is peaceful, free of hate speech and/or actions, and is geared toward working out a solution instead of propogating a long-standing opposition.
415004
Racial Profiling: A Police Manager’s Perspective\n\nRacial profiling is one of the most complex and controversial issues facing law enforcement professionals today. It is an issue that provokes impassioned debate and extensive division within all segments of the community. Whether racial profiling by police officers is a matter of perception or reality loses significance when considering the widespread public belief in its existence and the subsequent liability for law enforcement agencies that encounter allegations of racial profiling.\nThe practice of racial profiling has no place in law enforcement. It is an activity that undermines the public trust vital for an effective community policing organization. Police must be perceived as both providers of public safety and deferential to the civil liberties of those they have sworn to protect and serve. While the majority of police officers serve their communities in a professional and ethical manner, the debate over the reality of racial profiling as a practice in law enforcement is loudest on the side of its existence on a national level. In fact, a 1999 Gallup Poll reveals that 60% of Americans polled believe racial profiling exists. To restore public trust and improve community/police relationships, law enforcement agencies must address both the concerns of the community at large that are relevant to discriminatory policing, and the allegations of racial profiling made by ordinary citizens.\n\nWhat is Racial Profiling?\n\nAn agreed upon definition of racial profiling is almost as controversial as the practice itself. For example, S.989, legislation currently being considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee and commonly referred to as the “End Racial Profiling Act of 2001,” defines racial profiling as 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. Opponents of this legislation consider this too broad a definition encouraging the idea of profiling by police for malevolent motives and adding more confusion and conflict to this incendiary issue even as police executives attempt to develop policies for the effective management and eradication of this practice.\n\nA more common sense definition subscribed to by many police administrators maintains that racial profiling is the use of race as the “sole” basis for a stop. A number of states, including California, have adopted the definition of racial profiling as the practice of detaining a suspect based on a broad set of criteria that casts suspicion on an entire class of people without any individualized suspicion of the particular person being stopped.\n\n\nFurther complicating any conformity of definition in identifying the activity of racial profiling is the distinction made by some activists, including Heather McDonald, a writer for the Manhattan Institute, between “hard profiling” (use of race as the only factor in determining the likelihood of criminal conduct) and “soft profiling” (use of race as one factor among others in assessing the propensity for criminal behavior). Where there is a consensus of agreement concerning this issue is that the practice of racial profiling not only violates the fundamental principles of a democratic society but also is illegal and morally wrong.\n\nIn view of the current social environment and to limit civil liability often associated with allegations of racial profiling, law enforcement agencies must first develop written policies specifically p
870986
Of course it is, its not as bad as other countries though. Even the ones that are smaller then us, but crime in America is getting ridiculuously high. Most of the tax money is spent towards better education, which helps in no way to ensure a better future. The criminals are going to get to you faster then stupidity will. And thanks to Bush's No Child Left Behind Act, most American children just got their standards lowered. Making them favor hate, racism, prejudice and all those harmful ... things...
541355
If a terrorist is having contact with my neighbors or my local business man I would like to know.  We have had two 911 involved persons arrested in our area.  The safety of ALL Americans regardless of  color is the reason for collecting the phone records!!!!!!\n\nSo I say yes they are.\n\nJust for the record:  Our service persons deserve any and all ways of collecting information if it means they come home alive!!!!\n\nI didn't vote for either Bush....
827461
Where are the facts and statistics showing this. Maybe you are the only one that notices this. Try not to include race it only shows prejudice.
97296
Sad to say but yes.  Just be careful not to be one of those people.  Remember when people do things that you find to be ignorant or senseless, it has nothing to do with their race but everything to do with the individual's character.  If people can do that then eventually racial profiling will end.  What a day that will be!!!!!
919587
Welcome to America. In this "great" country of ours, we are told that racial makeup doesn't matter; that we are a "melting pot" for the rest of society. Yet racism is a huge problem in this country and has been for years. I would also venture to guess that America is highly Xenophobic, in that they don't want to know how the rest of the world works culturally or even economically (politically is another matter entirely; just look at the present mess in Iraq).\n\nPaul
294251
Over 95% of the population is immigrants..., most immigration policy is based on racial profiling...
112632
Your statistics are not factual. \n\nHate Crime is not defined by the race of the persons involved. A hate crime is defined by state law as one that involves threats, harassment, or physical harm and is motivated by prejudice against someone's RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ETHNICITY, SEXUAL ORIENTATION or PHYSICAL or MENTAL disability.\n\nJudging by your comments it is evident that you are uninformed and it also appears that you have a chip on your shoulder.\n\nI would hope that you leave this forum a more informed person. :)\n\n** And for JUSTSWIMMIN, there is no such thing as reverse prejudice. Either one is prejudiced or they are not. Being prejudiced is not exclusive of one race, ethnicity,color, religion,or sexual orientation. Anyone can be prejudiced.
133593
Andy Rooney  said on "60 Minutes" a few weeks back:    \n\nWhen 70% of the people who get arrested are black, in cities where 70% of the population is black, that is not racial profiling, it is the Law of Probability. \n\nI don't think being a minority makes you a victim of anything except numbers. The only things I can think of that are truly discriminatory are things like the United Negro College Fund, Jet Magazine, Black Entertainment Television, and Miss Black America. Try to have things like the United Caucasian College Fund, Cloud Magazine, White Entertainment Television, or Miss White America; and see what happens...Jesse Jackson will be knocking down your door.
790558
I'm not sure if its a pattern, but Its definitely NOT NEW. Every country back in the past 300 or so years had at least one immigration issue stemming from the difficulty of a few immigrants to assimilate, and unfortunately due to typical human insecurity and prejudice this expands into racism and hate. The Jews in Europe are one of the more famous cases of this (yes there was hate of jews even before but it expanded considerably in the last 200-300 years), The US also had it with Germans and Asians in the pre-World War I/II years. In the end though in most of the cases the affected countries end up surviving the so-called "invasion".\n\nIts the same today... a few scum Hispanics defy US culture, then certain "Americans" take this to mean ALL Hispanics defy the USA. In Europe some radical Muslims make trouble and this results into a general prejudice against Muslims. However since this is today (not 50 or even 200 years ago) and the circumstances are different with new ideas like multiculturalism (which ironically increases ethnocentrism in some quarters)... so no one really knows 100% what the outcome of these issues are.
22146
No, racism and bigotry aren't crimes.\n\nAnd even if they were, why would you punish a whole country for something ridiculous some nutcase said?   \n\nIf you start doing that, imagine the fines that will be levied to the USA for each "Bushism".