what is the controversy over institutionalized racial profiling?
403068
First of all it is unconstitutional to make status a crime, that is someone cannot be lawfully detained unless there is proper cause or there is presidential authority under times of war. Only lately have decisions come down in Supreme Court which give basic rights to those detained in the US base in Cuba (Guantanomo Bay). \n\nThe problem with racial profiling is that it can lead to unconstiutional arrests and basic harrassment of minority groups simply based on skin color. This gives too many people, even those who are not racist and have good intentions, too broad of a license to police. \n\nThe question is: Once we start eliminating the constitutional rights of some, how long before our own rights are eliminated for what we think is a valid reason at the time. The whole point of the constitution and bill of rights is that those rights are inalienable, meaning they cannot be taken away or given away no matter what we think. Our founding fathers realized there will always be times when it seems our rights should take second to our needs, however, they also realize that certain rights are never worth compromising. Racial profiling leads us down that same wrong path of compromise.\n\nIt does not legally exists, but is still a policy used by certain police departments in urban areas and is used grossly by the FBI.\n\nThat is the jist of the controversy.
868700
In all discrimination cases, the main question is what standard of review should be applied. The simplest is Rational Basis -- anything goes, as long as there is any legal excuse for having the law. The toughest is Strict Scrutiny -- the regulation fails unless there is no other possible way the state could have done what it was trying to do, and what the state was trying to do must have been very important. Those aren't the legal definitions, but close enough.\n\nIn any situation where the discrimination involves who can exercise fundamental rights, Strict Scrutiny applies. That's a function of Substance Due Process. For other rights that are not fundamental, lesser standards apply. So, for example, the right to  eat fatty foods is not a fundamental right, so can be regulated more easily than the right to worship in the privacy of your home, which is fundamental.\n\nAlso, where the discrimination involves a suspect class (race, ancestry, national origin), again Strict Scrutiny applies. Other discrimination is subject to lesser standards. So, a law which discriminates (meaning, operates differently or treats people differently) based on race is less likely to be found valid than a law which operates based on what college degrees someone has, since college education is not a suspect class.
488210
You expect too much out of them.\nWe have to stop the racism ourselves. \n\nHowever, police departments should have specific rules against racial profiling.\n\nIt would be good for neighborhoods sensitive to these issues that are homogenous, racially, to have police of the same race to avoid the appearance and lesson the posibility of the appearance of racism.\n\nPeace!!
337006
Absolutely. \n\nI tried to find someone in the Illinois registry and it was divided up by county! I searched though over 6000 offenders!\n\nThere is nothing like the shock of seeing someone you know (or thought you knew) displayed in a local registry. As a survivor, I am appalled by the way this system is handled though I am grateful it is better than nothing.
294251
Over 95% of the population is immigrants..., most immigration policy is based on racial profiling...
990073
Even if they did fingerprint them,you'd have the ***hole ACLU filing a lawsuit,saying you are RACIALLY PROFILING them!! WHOEVER came up with all this political correctness shit,should be shot!!!!!!!
1112321
Not sure if you agree with the piece or if you wrote it.  Either way I can see why you would get criticism over it and you shouldn't let it bother you.  There are fringes everywhere that attack anything they view as negative to their cause or beliefs.\n\nOne thing is what that article is talking about is a social disorder.  By that I mean the problem did not come up over night.  The community changed over years to become what it is and by that when criticism comes it comes to the community.  Over all people fear change, even if it is change for the good.  When change of any type is talked about, there will be those who oppose it.\n\nAnother is fear of stereo typing.  There are people who think that if a certain segment is what is being talked about the others will think the entire population is the same way.  The belief that if someone says there is a gang problem with blacks in the inner cities that some one will translate that to mean that all blacks are criminals.  These people will believe that social change should be effected by concentrating on the positive aspects of the race rather than talk about its problems.  They believe positive role models will influence the youth for a better environment of the future rather than giving them negative role models to emulate.\n\nEither way if you are trying to effect social change, get ready for a long road.  Social problems like inner city crime are institutional.  They have been going on for years and years.  The solution will take years and years to happen, and on that road there will probably be many who criticize because the truth hurts sometimes or they do not agree with the coarse you are taking.
228887
It sounds like it is controversial right now.  Check out the links below....
963584
In my honest and humble opinion... I think the government is doing it to avoid a law suit or being labeled as prejudice themselves. The government isn't the ones that said hey im being discriminated against because of my race or nationality it is a few squeaky wheels that messed with the cog so much our government had no choice but to acknowledge there is a difference in skin tones. Its scary that people always blame someone else often our government for their short comings rather than accept that they aren't perfect, learn from their mistakes, move on, and try to become better people by learning from their mistakes.\n\n\nHave a GREAT day!
436485
That's the thing with race - it's a self-selecting category.  There is no way to police any of it.  But the most important thing about race in any case is what people feel they are and how they believe they're being treated.  So race may be a bad way to understand IQs (because self-identification has nothing to do with DNA or biology) but it may be a good way to understand income (because how much money you make may be based on how you are perceived).\n\nIn any case, the census has a box for "other" and people can just write in whatever they want.
1022168
If you think that race is not a factor in terms of a job or getting into a school, then you are in denial.  Sometimes it works in favor of the minority, sometimes in the favor of the majority.  Private schools may not have an official affirmative action policy but they still allow you to include your race on the application, and still list the statistics of different races enrolled at their university.  What is the purpose for keeping these up to date statistics about races attending their schools.
1114703
First, it is so UNFORTUNATE that this question became a venue for ignorant gay bashers.  \nAnyhow, the answer is....it is not necessarily illegal but in certain circumstances it is unethical.  As a nursing student we are trained to inquire about and assess certain risk factors--- especially when dealing with blood.  However, discrimination or "profiling" is completely unprofessional.  For instance, African Americans are more likely to contract HIV than Caucasians.  Does that mean we stop taking blood from African Americans? Of course not.  Making vast generalizations such as "most gays have HIV" is damaging.  As another post said, it may not be that you are gay....but it may be answers to other questions regarding risky behavior.  (thats why we ask them) If that's not it, then my guess is that you got a nurse/phlebotomist who was new, uneducated, or overly paranoid.  Great question.  Very eye-opening.
38008
We should be careful not to confuse Cultural Defense to Racial issues.\n\nCultural defense goes beyond racial profiling but rather goes to the very core of people who are born-to and live in a place dictated by local customs and traditions unique to the place.\n\nCultural defense comes into play if and only if a specific culture unique to the person and place is in danger by outside principles and truths that can infringe local culture and custom.
327577
I completely agree. It has nothing to do with racial profiling, its about securing the border and having a little more authority over those coming here. But, unfortunatly no matter what case may be someone has to turn it to a racial issue.
45088
if race shouldn't matter, then race shouldn't be on the application.\n\ncan you imagine if they asked what polital party you belonged to?\n\nto me, asking for someone's race on an application is clearly a form of racism, and one that doesn't always harm or benefit the race of the person being asked.\n\n//
426731
Singling people out no matter what the race, creed or color is wrong. I'm disappointed to hear that this happened especially on the elementary school level. It perhaps sent out a message, but one we are trying to avoid. As my school prepared for a MLK Day celebration one elequent speaker came to our school and said the following:\n\n(Yes, I'm paraphrasing)\n\n "In our day and age, I feel that sometimes people of my own race are bringing judgements upon themselves unnecessarily. They preach of equality, but when given the rights, want more. Yes, we cannot deny the treatment of Blacks was unacceptable. But must we dwell on the past instead of embracing the future? If we seek equality, why do we draw attention upon ourselves? Why have a "Black History Month?" Is there a "White History Month?" We are asking not to be set "a part." Yes we insist on our own month to celebrate our fine figures from the past? Shouldn't EVERY day of every month be a celebration of what these fine people did? We should live by their words, not force their word."\n\nI think what the world needs is to accept that we are more open-minded than we were 30-40 years ago. Sure, we have pockets of our population that will never be. But the change has been immense. Thank God! This speakers words spoken so elequently made so much sense to all those in that room that day. I think it brought the school together with a "sigh" of relief. All races realized we were working together.....no one is set apart. There is no need to favor a soul in our world today. We all prove who we are by being.....who we are. \n\nThank you for sharing the poem. My hope is that schools such as this, ideals such as this, practices such as this will so very soon be a thing of the distant past.
344488
I believe that it does.  Even in states where there are a ton of ethnicity's like New York it happens.  I also be live that there is profiling against teens.  I am also not sure that this profiling is just black.  I believe that more and more people of middle eastern back-round have been experiencing profiling.  I would hope that many police do not do it on purpose while I know many do.  Ignorance is bliss and I believe that these people of authority need to be enlightened that there are many different people in this nation... . That is what makes this the USA.  Perhaps some training on a bi-annual basis would help, but I do not think it is something that will ever be eliminated.  Sad as far as I am concerned!