What is so bad about profiling?

[soulcougher73]

I was reading the AZ Immigration thread and as always profiling comes up as an issue. But what really is the issue with profiling?

I just see it as identifying a pattern and reacting to it. That pattern can change and you need to be able to see it.

My guess is its mostly PC BS because some people get butt hurt about being labeled by the patterns people see. What if instead of being butt hurt about it you attempted to change the pattern for the better to avoid being profiled in such a way?

I remember some comedian saying right after 9/11 abotu profiling terrorists. It was something along the lines of "What if all the 9/11 terrorists/hi-jackers were all 25-30 something white balding male midgets. Would you not stop every midget that boarded a plane that fit that discription?" Would seem silly not to in my book.

Just curious what P&N'ers actually think about profling. Obviously its wrong in the US currently, but do you agree with it?

Lets not turn this into a flamefest. Id like logical reason for or against it in your own opinions.

 

[Vette73]

Nothing wrong, as long as you are not it. Second you become it...

 

[FuzzyBee]

Some people care more about offending others than they do about their safety or the likelihood that others are following the law.

 

[CanOWorms]

I remember some comedian saying right after 9/11 abotu profiling terrorists. It was something along the lines of "What if all the 9/11 terrorists/hi-jackers were all 25-30 something white balding male midgets. Would you not stop every midget that boarded a plane that fit that discription?" Would seem silly not to in my book.

Many of the post 9-11 terrorists have been of different ethnicity/race. It would seem silly not to follow the same standards on everyone.

Profiling seems like it addresses old or current threats rather than new or emerging threats, too.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Ethnic profiling is problematic because while latinos may comprise the largest portion of illegal immigrants, they are also one of the largest minorities of legal residents. If you start ethnically profiling people for immigration enforcement, you are going to be asking a shitload of American citizens and legal resident aliens for their papers. You are also going to miss a lot of illegals who "look American".

The Israelis found a similar problem in trying to profile terrorists; when they initially investigated primarily people who "looked Palestinian" they found the terrorists started recruiting Europeans (and those who "looked European") for their missions. Israel now employs behavioral profiling instead of ethnic profiling, and they have the safest airline in the world...

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

I remember when they pulled Al Gore aside to do a random check of him...it is fucking Al Gore. What a waste of time.

Profiling works, plain and simple. I think that those that fit into the category need to have a sense of nationalism and say "Yes, thanks to these fuckheads I may be scrutinized a bit more than someone else." We may all have our turn and it should be out of a sense of doing something good collectively for American security and making a small sacrifice because you were unlucky enough to fit a specific profile.

I do think profiling needs to be trained though. Not everyone can do it. Bubba from Alabama becomes a TSA and starts screening everyone that is brown. This isn't profiling; it is prejudice. But I do think it would be fair to pull Middle Eastern looking males in the age group of 19-40 that are travelling alone out of the line for additional questioning. There is no reason to randomly search me when I'm travelling with my wife and 2 young kids to Florida.

And if the terrorists change their tactic and they start recruiting white males between the ages of 19-40 who travel with family I will accept the fact that I fit a particular profile and may be slightly delayed... again, a sacrifice I am willing to make for security. It is a shit ton better than removing my shoes and not carrying liquids through security.

Edit: Let me add that it is a mixture of ethnic and behavioral profiling by trained professionals that works, not just saying "SEARCH ALL ARABS!"

 

[ayabe]

Nothing wrong, as long as you are not it. Second you become it...

Pretty much. We'll see how everyone feels about stuff like this in 30 years when white people are a minority.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I was reading the AZ Immigration thread and as always profiling comes up as an issue. But what really is the issue with profiling?

I just see it as identifying a pattern and reacting to it. That pattern can change and you need to be able to see it.

My guess is its mostly PC BS because some people get butt hurt about being labeled by the patterns people see. What if instead of being butt hurt about it you attempted to change the pattern for the better to avoid being profiled in such a way?

I remember some comedian saying right after 9/11 abotu profiling terrorists. It was something along the lines of "What if all the 9/11 terrorists/hi-jackers were all 25-30 something white balding male midgets. Would you not stop every midget that boarded a plane that fit that discription?" Would seem silly not to in my book.

Just curious what P&N'ers actually think about profling. Obviously its wrong in the US currently, but do you agree with it?

Lets not turn this into a flamefest. Id like logical reason for or against it in your own opinions.

Nothing is wrong with profiling until you become the one who is profiled!
Obviously you haven`t been profiled or you would not be asking such a knee jerk question!

 

[dullard]

Like others have said, imagine if you were the one being profiled. You'd clearly see the problem then.

Timothy McVeigh was a white male that bombed Oklahoma City. Ted Kaczynski was a white male that sent mail bombs for 20 years. Lets now write a law similar to the original AZ law (before it was tamed down). The law will state that all police officers must question all white males that they come in contact with and arrest them if they don't have proper non-bomber papers. Think about it.

While that would be a big waste of time for the white males who are stopped, but it would be a much bigger waste of time and resources for the police. Instead of stopping actual bombers, they suddenly have to look at millions of non-bombers simply because they are white-males. Profiling burries the police in a pile of useless work when they could be spending their time looking at actual criminals (or likely criminals). Instead they are looking at people with the hated appearance of the day (a fad that will change frequently).

Plus, as profiles are moving targets (a non-white or non-male may bomb someone somewhere eventually), profiling never works in the long-run.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

Like others have said, imagine if you were the one being profiled. You'd clearly see the problem then.

Timothy McVeigh was a white male that bombed Oklahoma City. Ted Kaczynski was a white male that sent mail bombs for 20 years. Lets now write a law similar to the original AZ law (before it was tamed down). The law will state that all police officers must question all white males that they come in contact with and arrest them if they don't have proper non-bomber papers. Think about it.

What do you think happens when there is a serial killer? Females are rarely serial killers. They are generally white males aged 19-35. That demographic, while not stopped on the street, is given the most attention.

You gave an example of two guys who did stupid things. We are talking about (in the case of AZ law) MILLIONS of illegal immigrants who fit a profile. You produce millions of white males sending out letter bombs and I'll agree that we need to be profiled.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

Let me make an analogy.

When I build or repair a computer and it doesn't boot properly I have a list of components to look at. Step one is to ensure power supply is functional and everything is hooked up correctly. Step two is to test the RAM. 9 times out of 10 (if there is a problem) it is either power supply or memory (bad, incompatible, whatever.)

I don't sit down and say, "Well, I know 90% of the time it is the RAM or power supply, but I'm going to check the add-on cards, transistors on the motherboard, electrical outlet, and hard drive." Why? Because I've been doing this long enough to know where 90% of the problem is: memory and power supply. I don't waste my time on other components until I've eliminated those two as the culprit.

Is this hardware profiling? Why you always gotta be checkin' the RAM? Because while not all RAM is faulty, if there is a problem it is very likely the RAM.

In Arizona, not every Mexican is here illegal. But when 90% of the illegals are Mexican it makes sense to focus on them...

 

[BoomerD]

What's wrong with racial profiling?

NOT A DAMMED THING.

 

[dullard]

Let me make an analogy.

When I build or repair a computer and it doesn't boot properly I have a list of components to look at. Step one is to ensure power supply is functional and everything is hooked up correctly. Step two is to test the RAM. 9 times out of 10 (if there is a problem) it is either power supply or memory (bad, incompatible, whatever.

The main problem with your analogy is bolded. In your analogy, the computer is bad to begin with. When an officer comes across a hispanic person, very often the person is legal. If every hispanic person was illegal, THEN your analogy would be a good one. It is better to check the broken computers than to check all computers. Similarly, it is better to check the illegals than all hispanic people.

Also, in your analogy a simple test is just that, simple. It is cheap and almost instantaneous to do the tests. The same isn't true with hispanics. Stopping millions of people isn't cheap and it isn't instantaneous. A better analogy would involve something costly. Suppose you had to pay Geek Squad at Best Buy $25 to test your computer, would you pay to test it with your method even before you knew if it was functioning properly? Probably not. Again that brings us back to your main problem: you are assuming they are illegal when in fact many times they are legal.

Finally, while it may be 9/10 times the power supply or the memory, I highly doubt 9/10 hispanic people are illegally in this country. I don't know the data, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong. It may be 9/10 in some local areas, but I do not think it is that way nationally.

Not to mention, racial profiling in this situation is addressing the wrong issue. Pretend congress/Obama today gave all illegals instant and free amnesty and allowed all future people to enter legally. Will the problems (crime, unemployment, tax avoidance, language, hatred, etc) go away? Nope. Going after people with the wrong paperwork isn't going to solve the problems. We need to fix the real problems (crime, unemployment, tax avoidance, language, hatred, etc) instead of avoiding those problems and instead blaming people with a different look.

 

[Red Dawn]

What's wrong with racial profiling?

NOT A DAMMED THING.

Especially for us White guys, there not much of a chance that we are going to be racially profiled.

 

[CanOWorms]

I remember when they pulled Al Gore aside to do a random check of him...it is fucking Al Gore. What a waste of time.

Profiling works, plain and simple. I think that those that fit into the category need to have a sense of nationalism and say "Yes, thanks to these fuckheads I may be scrutinized a bit more than someone else." We may all have our turn and it should be out of a sense of doing something good collectively for American security and making a small sacrifice because you were unlucky enough to fit a specific profile.

I do think profiling needs to be trained though. Not everyone can do it. Bubba from Alabama becomes a TSA and starts screening everyone that is brown. This isn't profiling; it is prejudice. But I do think it would be fair to pull Middle Eastern looking males in the age group of 19-40 that are travelling alone out of the line for additional questioning. There is no reason to randomly search me when I'm travelling with my wife and 2 young kids to Florida.

And if the terrorists change their tactic and they start recruiting white males between the ages of 19-40 who travel with family I will accept the fact that I fit a particular profile and may be slightly delayed... again, a sacrifice I am willing to make for security. It is a shit ton better than removing my shoes and not carrying liquids through security.

Edit: Let me add that it is a mixture of ethnic and behavioral profiling by trained professionals that works, not just saying "SEARCH ALL ARABS!"

Why do you assume airport security checks are only for anti-terrorism measures? It's also for smuggling (drugs, animals, weapons, etc.).

White males own a lot of guns and other related weapons. Many white males are currently Tea Party, angry at the government types. Shouldn't they be profiled in your world?

 

[Fern]

I was reading the AZ Immigration thread and as always profiling comes up as an issue. But what really is the issue with profiling?
-snip-

I think in any rational discussion of "profiling" we need to make a distinction between the simplistic/unrefined (and generally ineffective) type of profiling where we look at a single characteristic such as skin color vs the more sophisticated type of profiling.

For example stopping someone merely because of their skin color or ethnic appearence is very ineffective. A good chunk of the legal population here has brown skin color etc.

However, IMO, that does not mean it shouldn't be considered as one of many factors. But too often when the term 'profiling' is mentioned people automatically assume it is the simple type.

Fern

 

[DesiPower]

Let me make an analogy.

When I build or repair a computer and it doesn't boot properly I have a list of components to look at. Step one is to ensure power supply is functional and everything is hooked up correctly. Step two is to test the RAM. 9 times out of 10 (if there is a problem) it is either power supply or memory (bad, incompatible, whatever.)

I don't sit down and say, "Well, I know 90% of the time it is the RAM or power supply, but I'm going to check the add-on cards, transistors on the motherboard, electrical outlet, and hard drive." Why? Because I've been doing this long enough to know where 90% of the problem is: memory and power supply. I don't waste my time on other components until I've eliminated those two as the culprit.

Is this hardware profiling? Why you always gotta be checkin' the RAM? Because while not all RAM is faulty, if there is a problem it is very likely the RAM.

In Arizona, not every Mexican is here illegal. But when 90% of the illegals are Mexican it makes sense to focus on them...

This is not a medical issue, its a immigration issue, let me make an analogy. If a workplace has 3 different vendors and the computers from one of the vendor are failing left and rights and has some viruses that are constantly infecting the server... WWAD??

 

[nobodyknows]

Especially for us White guys, there not much of a chance that we are going to be racially profiled.

If they happen to get pulled over for something and can't speak English, why wouldn't they get checked?

 

[soulcougher73]

Nothing is wrong with profiling until you become the one who is profiled!
Obviously you haven`t been profiled or you would not be asking such a knee jerk question!

I would have no problem being profiled if all of a sudden white males of the age 37 decided to blow themselves up or go on a car jacking spree. I would expect to be profiled, and be mad that these other white 37 year old males are making me look bad. And i would try to get them to change there minds about doing it.

I guess im old school of call a spade a spade. I dont like to sugar coat it some someones feelings dont get hurt.

Change the pattern, change the profile.

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Because latino US citizens shouldn't be harrassed by cops because they look like they could be illegal.

 

[dullard]

However, IMO, that does not mean it shouldn't be considered as one of many factors. But too often when the term 'profiling' is mentioned people automatically assume it is the simple type.

That ultimately is a big problem with profiling. It tends to degrade into the simple type. The probably-more-likely-to-be-a-criminal quickly becomes assumed-to-be-a-criminal.

Honestly, it is hard to blame the profilers, they are looking for a needle in a haystack with too many conflicting descriptions of the needle. Pretty soon, they simply look for something sharp (since that is a command that is able to be grasped and used in practice) and they proceed as if it were a needle before actually finding out if it is a needle. It isn't necessarilly the profilers who are bad, it is just the profiling task is too complex in practice.

Apple of Sodom's analogy did a good job of pointing out that assumption. He started with all broken computers to do the testing. He assumes all brown people are illegal. Soon you get the "walking while brown" type of crime.

Plainclothes officers with the best intention are on a sting for illegals. They know to look for many different behavior and physical characteristics, one of which includes being brown. A brown person walks by and they jump out with guns and shout. The brown person is surprized, sees a bunch of thug-like men with guns and obeys a typical instinct by running away. Now we are no longer in the comfort of our home/work talking about profiling. Now we are officers in the heat of a moment with a suspected person running away. We have a split second to make a decision. Do we weigh the slighly increased probability of being a criminal because he is brown vs the other mitigating characteristics? Or do we run after him? We run. Our minds blurred in the confusion think brown - must be illegal. Why is he running? Because he is illegal. Thus, we were correct in our assumption that he was illegal. Perfect, now shoot to kill.

Happens all the time. Just like that.

Profiling sounds great in a cushy chair. Not so much in the field.

 

[soulcougher73]

Like others have said, imagine if you were the one being profiled. You'd clearly see the problem then.

Timothy McVeigh was a white male that bombed Oklahoma City. Ted Kaczynski was a white male that sent mail bombs for 20 years. Lets now write a law similar to the original AZ law (before it was tamed down). The law will state that all police officers must question all white males that they come in contact with and arrest them if they don't have proper non-bomber papers. Think about it.

While that would be a big waste of time for the white males who are stopped, but it would be a much bigger waste of time and resources for the police. Instead of stopping actual bombers, they suddenly have to look at millions of non-bombers simply because they are white-males. Profiling burries the police in a pile of useless work when they could be spending their time looking at actual criminals (or likely criminals). Instead they are looking at people with the hated appearance of the day (a fad that will change frequently).

Plus, as profiles are moving targets (a non-white or non-male may bomb someone somewhere eventually), profiling never works in the long-run.

While i understand what you are saying and agree with it mostly, you did pick a horrible comparison only on the fact of percentages or odds. Sure white males seem to like to blow up stuff here in America, but its only been a handful. Not even .0001%. I tend to look at the patterns as percentages or odds that said pattern will happen.

 

[soulcougher73]

What do you think happens when there is a serial killer? Females are rarely serial killers. They are generally white males aged 19-35. That demographic, while not stopped on the street, is given the most attention.

You gave an example of two guys who did stupid things. We are talking about (in the case of AZ law) MILLIONS of illegal immigrants who fit a profile. You produce millions of white males sending out letter bombs and I'll agree that we need to be profiled.

And this.

 

[soulcougher73]

The main problem with your analogy is bolded. In your analogy, the computer is bad to begin with. When an officer comes across a hispanic person, very often the person is legal. If every hispanic person was illegal, THEN your analogy would be a good one. It is better to check the broken computers than to check all computers. Similarly, it is better to check the illegals than all hispanic people.

Also, in your analogy a simple test is just that, simple. It is cheap and almost instantaneous to do the tests. The same isn't true with hispanics. Stopping millions of people isn't cheap and it isn't instantaneous. A better analogy would involve something costly. Suppose you had to pay Geek Squad at Best Buy $25 to test your computer, would you pay to test it with your method even before you knew if it was functioning properly? Probably not. Again that brings us back to your main problem: you are assuming they are illegal when in fact many times they are legal.

Finally, while it may be 9/10 times the power supply or the memory, I highly doubt 9/10 hispanic people are illegally in this country. I don't know the data, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong. It may be 9/10 in some local areas, but I do not think it is that way nationally.

Not to mention, racial profiling in this situation is addressing the wrong issue. Pretend congress/Obama today gave all illegals instant and free amnesty and allowed all future people to enter legally. Will the problems (crime, unemployment, tax avoidance, language, hatred, etc) go away? Nope. Going after people with the wrong paperwork isn't going to solve the problems. We need to fix the real problems (crime, unemployment, tax avoidance, language, hatred, etc) instead of avoiding those problems and instead blaming people with a different look.

The bolded above makes no sense. You cannot tell someone is illegal without checking. Its not like the are wearing a sign around there neck saying "look at me im illegal". You just base your choices on a hispanic being illegal more then a black person being illegal. As i said in my OP its all about patterns. If all a sudden there is a huge influx or problem with black illegals then the profile pattern will change to include them. You and "your kind" create the pattern others see, and only you and "your kind" can change the pattern.

Bolded 2: But at the same time they are illegal more often then other nationalities. Just gotta go with the odds.

 

[JTsyo]

The other thing to realize is that it isn't something that would happen once, it would happen everyday. Would you want the police stopping you everyday to ensure you were a US citizen? It would get on on your nerves very quickly. To subject a part of the population to that harassment is unjust. The way the law is written now, you have to at least commit another crime/infraction before drawing the attention of the police.