What is wrong with racial/religious profiling?

[her209]

The airline bomber in the news is Black. So much for racial profiling?

Timothy McVeigh with the assistance of Terry Nichols, blew up Oklahoma City's Federal Building... so what?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

http://arstechnica.com/science/news...ling-no-more-effective-than-random-screen.ars

This guy seems to disagree with you.

http://www.lamberthconsulting.com/about-racial-profiling/racial-profiling-doesnt-work.asp

These guys too.

I missed this post.
The second site isn't loading but the first link does.

First I'd like to see where Press says

Study: racial profiling no more effective than random screen

Press didn't say that profiling won't work. He's saying that the methodology was flawed. If the system resamples the same individuals to the exclusion of all others, then the number of people examined falls. That's a serious flaw and measures would need to prevent that. Note that he addressed that issue.

According to Press, the solution is something that's widely recognized by the statistics community: identify individuals for robust screening based on the square root of their risk value. That gives the profile some weight, but distributes the screening much more broadly through the population, and uses limited resources more effectively. It's so widely used in mathematical circles that Press concludes his paper by writing, "It seems peculiar that the method is not better known."

If profiles have no advantage, why give it weight at all, and where does he say that it's no more effective random?

 

[MJinZ]

Timothy McVeigh with the assistance of Terry Nichols, blew up Oklahoma City's Federal Building... so what?

Well, domestic terrorism threats are a little different, and are rarer.

Most of these racial profiling issues have to do with foreign terrorists.

 

[n yusef]

Out of the 1.5+ billion Muslims in the world, how many attempt to commit terrorism on airplanes in America? This number must be low (a liberal estimate would be in the thousands), considering the relative rarity of these terrorist attacks.

To advocate for profiling in this situation is to be ignorant of Bayes' theorem, and therefore statistics in general.

 

[theflyingpig]

Out of the 1.5+ billion Muslims in the world, how many attempt to commit terrorism on airplanes in America? This number must be low (a liberal estimate would be in the thousands), considering the relative rarity of these terrorist attacks.

To advocate for profiling in this situation is to be ignorant of Bayes' theory, and therefore statistics in general.

More Muslims commit acts of terrorism than any other group of people in the world. That is a fact. To deny it would be foolish. Everyone knows this.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Out of the 1.5+ billion Muslims in the world, how many attempt to commit terrorism on airplanes in America? This number must be low (a liberal estimate would be in the thousands), considering the relative rarity of these terrorist attacks.

To advocate for profiling in this situation is to be ignorant of Bayes' theorem, and therefore statistics in general.

Give Press a call, he's waiting with bated breath.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

More Muslims commit acts of terrorism than any other group of people in the world. That is a fact. To deny it would be foolish. Everyone knows this.

Which does not mean that all Muslims are terrorists. What is being debated (well ok, what I'm saying at least) is that profiling can be part of a thought out screening program. It shouldn't be used to the exclusion of all things because it's not the only criteria available. Maybe that's what people are having a cow about, thinking I mean it's THE way to predict something. Fuck knows.

If you are having a screening program at all you want to consider all variables which would give you an edge, and weigh them to give the best results.

That said, if a billion or so people wanted you dead, you wouldn't be posting now.

 

[fallout man]

There is nothing wrong with religious/racial profiling. It is smart;

I agree you wholeheartedly, until it happens to "your kind" or "my kind."

Setting a precedent like this, based on the support of easily-frightened, pant-pissing pinheads, only sets you up for failure when the current majority US voting block becomes a white minority.

I guess then you'll have to cling to your guns and religion to get your country back (lol). Good luck, Rambo. Everyone knows this.

 

[Patranus]

All travelers flying into the U.S. will receive tightened random screening, and 100 percent of passengers from seven terrorism-prone countries will be patted down and have carry-ons searched

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31122.html

Looks like they might have gotten the memo.

 

[piasabird]

If members of a religious group are recruiting murderers of women and children then profiling is what is needed along with demolishing of their meeting places. A church or a religion is invalid when they start promoting criminal activity. If a group starts promoting illegal activity it turns int an organized criminal organization. If God is telling you to go kill people, then maybe you are mentally ill.

 

[fallout man]

If members of a religious group are recruiting murderers of women and children then profiling is what is needed along with demolishing of their meeting places. A church or a religion is invalid when they start promoting criminal activity. If a group starts promoting illegal activity it turns int an organized criminal organization. If God is telling you to go kill people, then maybe you are mentally ill.

God willing, the government shall smite them.

What do you consider illegal activity by a church or a religious group? Everyone knows this.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You know, it's probably my failure in understanding Internet semantics, but I'm thinking the crux of the matter we haven't defined precisely what everyone is talking about. I went back over my posts and I could see where someone might think that I meant that religion ought to be THE factor in making a profile, but I'm saying that it should be taken into account. I've had discussions about this with others and if race or religion had any weight at all it was evil profiling or whatever. If data suggests that a characteristic is generally applicable then that needs to be taken into account. What weight it carries needs to be determined for it to mean anything.

 

[Dari]

This is a start. But it shouldn't have been made public and they should just add every country in the Middle East, bar Israel and Turkey.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8438803.stm

US toughens air screening rules
The US authorities are introducing tougher screening rules for passengers arriving by air from nations deemed to have links with terrorism.

Reports say people flying from Nigeria, Pakistan, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Yemen and Cuba will have pat-down body searches and have carry-on baggage searched.

President Barack Obama condemned lapses following the alleged Christmas Day bomb plot against a US plane.

He promised "to act quickly to fix flaws" in the security system.

The new security directives will come into effect on Monday.

Random checks

The Transportation Security Administration said in a statement that the new rules apply to passengers flying from or through countries on the US State Department's "State Sponsors of Terrorism" list - Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria - and "other countries of interest".

Nigeria and Yemen have been linked to the alleged failed Christmas Day plot.

The main suspect is Nigerian, and Yemen-based militants have claimed the attack.

The BBC's Jane O'Brien in Washington says it is unclear whether a pat-down could have stopped 23-year-old Nigerian accused Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, but Mr Obama has been under intense pressure to take action.

As part of the new guidelines, passengers travelling from any other foreign country will also be checked at random.

Earlier, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown gave the go-ahead for full body scanners to be introduced at Britain's airports.

Officials said the machines would be installed "as soon as is practical" at London's Heathrow Airport.

Also on Sunday, both the US and Britain closed their embassies in Yemen because of what officials say are continuing threats from al-Qaeda.

'Determined'

John Brennan, the US deputy national security adviser, said the group had "several hundred members" in Yemen and was posing an increasing threat there.

"This is something that we've known about for a while," he said. "We're determined to destroy al-Qaeda, whether it's in Pakistan, Afghanistan, or in Yemen."

Mr Brennan added: "We know that they have been targeting our embassy, our embassy personnel."

Last week an organisation called al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula urged Muslims to help in "killing every crusader who works at their embassies or other places".

In an internet statement, the group also said it was behind an attempt to bomb a transatlantic airliner on Christmas Day.

On Saturday, President Barack Obama said the organisation appeared to have trained Mr Abdulmutallab, who is being held in a US prison.

The US mission in Sanaa was the target of an attack in September 2008, which was blamed on al-Qaeda, and in which 19 people died, including a young American woman.

Also on Saturday, Gen David Petraeus, head of US military operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, visited Yemeni President Ali Abdallah Saleh to pledge US support for its fight with al-Qaeda.

The visit came a day after the general announced that the US would more than double counter-terrorism aid to Yemen this year.

 

[yllus]

Easy to narrow

Flown in from terrorist hot bed, check
Male between 15-40, check
Traveling alone or with other males, check
No checked bags on international fight, check

he gets xtra scrutiny/body scan

I don't see a problem with this.

 

[fskimospy]

I missed this post.
The second site isn't loading but the first link does.

First I'd like to see where Press says Press didn't say that profiling won't work. He's saying that the methodology was flawed. If the system resamples the same individuals to the exclusion of all others, then the number of people examined falls. That's a serious flaw and measures would need to prevent that. Note that he addressed that issue.

If profiles have no advantage, why give it weight at all, and where does he say that it's no more effective random?

What he is saying is that profiles as they are likely to be used are ineffective.

 

[FaaR]

The M and T were made painfully obvious. Cleverly disguised? Okey doke.

You are obviously hard of reading. Go back, try again. Perhaps the old cogs in your noggin will grind the right way if you give 'em a good greasing. Btw, you're not off to a great start, and it gets worse.

First a suggestion. Avoid any career which involves science or math.

Thanks for your advice. I will take it under due consideration. May I suggest you likewise avoid anything that involves ethics and law, as you're obviously deficient in both of those areas, and by extension, also public service. You're liable to fumble and lose our freedom in under the couch whilst preoccupied with looking for your T:s and M:s.

Let's restate your arguments:
Eddie Murphy can become a white dude in a movie, completely invalidating the data which exists, because the entire "T" population will become Eddie Murphy in a movie imitating a white guy.

That's not my arguments you authoritarianistic prat, and I'm pretty well convinced you know it too, as it's simply too hard to imagine you being such a fucking halfwit you can't even understand a simple comparison. If you manage to get your pants on with the fly facing the right way in the morning you should be able to comprehend that what something looks like and what it actually IS are two completely different things, which was my ACTUAL argument.

Ok Slappy,
If I'm so xenophobic or hate Muslims, why don't you embarrass me and find where I call for locking them up or whatever.

I don't have to "find" anything. You're busy advocating "whatever" right now, in post after post.

 

[tvarad]

This is a start. But it shouldn't have been made public and they should just add every country in the Middle East, bar Israel and Turkey.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8438803.stm

I agree that this is a knee-jerk reaction and a Maginot line at best but it is a start. What we now need is terrorist-profiling as it is quite clear that most terrorists have signatures which can be recognized at airports - like being radicalized in Western universities/mosques, traveling to terrorist hot-spots, relatively young and probably more traits that are classified, without announcing it on rooftops with loudspeakers. One size may not fit all but being one step ahead of the terrorists is what will keep travel safe. The latest misunderstander of Islam (tm) was actually arrested for plotting a terrorist attack on Hillary Clinton in Kenya but was yet able to find his way into Denmark and nearly hack the cartoonist and his grand-daughter to pieces. Speaks volumes about how immigration control in Western countries has become a joke.

 

[palehorse]

Going back just ten years, can someone please list for me the ethnicity of any airline terrorists who were not a "Muslim male of Asian, Persian, Arab, African, or Indonesian descent."

 

[theflyingpig]

Going back just ten years, can someone please list for me the ethnicity of any airline terrorists who were not a "Muslim male of Asian, Persian, Arab, African, or Indonesian descent."

Impossible because those are the group of people who make up the bulk of the worlds terrorist organizations. Sure, not all Muslims are terrorists, but if I tell someone to imagine a terrorist they will immediately think of Muslims. Some fools will try to tap dance around this fact, but anyone with a brain will see right through their stupidity. Everyone knows this.

 

[Rainsford]

Going back just ten years, can someone please list for me the ethnicity of any airline terrorists who were not a "Muslim male of Asian, Persian, Arab, African, or Indonesian descent."

Can someone (preferably you) tell me why that question is sufficient to justify profiling? I feel like the reason you're just repeating that "fact" and ignoring the practical considerations of profiling is that you can't really justify it fully.

 

[tvarad]

Can someone (preferably you) tell me why that question is sufficient to justify profiling? I feel like the reason you're just repeating that "fact" and ignoring the practical considerations of profiling is that you can't really justify it fully.

Because, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck you don't go looking for a turkey.

 

[fskimospy]

Going back just ten years, can someone please list for me the ethnicity of any airline terrorists who were not a "Muslim male of Asian, Persian, Arab, African, or Indonesian descent."

Richard Reed, the shoe bomber. Caucasian.

Next question?

 

[fskimospy]

Can someone (preferably you) tell me why that question is sufficient to justify profiling? I feel like the reason you're just repeating that "fact" and ignoring the practical considerations of profiling is that you can't really justify it fully.

They are trying really hard to ignore the statistical analysis done by people on the effectiveness of profiling (or the lack thereof). They feel in their gut that it should work, and so to them it DOES work.

 

[Patranus]

Richard Reed, the shoe bomber. Caucasian.

Next question?

Are you sure about that?
Where did he spend most of his time?
And what was his religion?
Why don't you read his background before you post. He most definitely fits the "profile" of someone who should receive more screening at an airport.

 

[Rainsford]

Impossible because those are the group of people who make up the bulk of the worlds terrorist organizations. Sure, not all Muslims are terrorists, but if I tell someone to imagine a terrorist they will immediately think of Muslims. Some fools will try to tap dance around this fact, but anyone with a brain will see right through their stupidity. Everyone knows this.

Listen carefully, because this is an important point about profiling. Even if 100% of terrorists are Muslim, that doesn't help profiling AT ALL. How do we PRACTICALLY profile someone based on religion. It's easy to SAY "profile Muslims", actually doing that is pretty much impossible in practice.