Profiling

[Lord Lothar]

Racial Profiling isn't always effective. My Uncle who originally came to Canada from Saudi Arabia (a lutheran pastor) was stopped at an airport and they didn't allow him to board his flight to a lutheran pastor's conference in the U.S. I mean honestly just because he's brown doesn't mean he's a terrorist.

[Timber Loftis]

Okay, folks the OKC-muslim connection and the google excursus are a bit [img]graemlins/offtopic.gif[/img]

It takes no genius to figure out that profiling is an effective tool. I've got to say that in Chicago, almost 90% of the crime reported at night on the news identifies the same suspect: He's male, black, and between the ages of 18 and 35. This does NOT mean that one can assume someone who fits the description will be the criminal or a criminal, but an investigator must make some assumptions based on the real world if he's to be effective.

As for not letting Lothar's uncle fly - that's different. Profiling is a way to select who you check or investigate. But racial and physical character in and of itself is no reason not to let them on the plane. I hate hate hate these radical extremists that are defining our world view today. In fact, this hatred of these people is one of the few things I'm extreme about myself. But, IT IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG to deny muslims or persons having a bit more melanin in their skin the right to fly just because you think the passengers will hate your airline for doing it. If you've checked them, and they have no means to harm the plane, then that is that.

And, to be specific, profiling is deductive reasoning, not logical reasoning. Pure logic states that just because an event has occurred before it is no reason to assume it will occur again - like the sunrise. But, deductive reasoning encourages us to plan for tomorrow just in case the sun does rise.

"As good sociologists we make generalizations about groups, not individuals" - Berger

[Spelca]

I guess it's the same in Europe since nobody answered. [img]tongue.gif[/img]
----

As far as I understood some want that only Middle Eastern people will get randomly searched. If I'm wrong, please correct me. [img]smile.gif[/img]
I think that focusing just on one 'type' (race?) of people would be stupid and also dangerous. Terrorists aren't stupid. Nobody knew they'd ram a plane into a building, and I'm sure nobody wants something like this to happen again. Now who is 100% sure that all terrorists fit the profile? I didn't know Timothy McVeigh (sp) was Middle Eastern...

Okay, let's say that all terrorist are Middle Eastern. And once they start searching only Middle Eastern people, don't you think they will find people who won't fit the profile and will be able to get through without being searched?

I don't see why people are so bothered by these searches. It's for their own saftey. Are they really so selfish that they're willing to sacrifice lives of others just so that they wouldn't be annoyed when searched?

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Spelca: Okay, let's say that all terrorist are Middle Eastern. And once they start searching only Middle Eastern people, don't you think they will find people who won't fit the profile and will be able to get through without being searched?

That's not how profiling works. You don't focus entirely on the group in question while ignoring everyone else. That would be ridiculous. Profiling focuses specifically on the group which is more likely to be involved in any activity while continuing to search other groups.

Timothy McVeigh is brought up over and over, but it's not a valid argument against profiling. No one is saying not to search young, white males. Everyone is subject to investigation, but those who fit the profile receive more attention.

[Spelca]

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: Timothy McVeigh is brought up over and over, but it's not a valid argument against profiling. No one is saying not to search young, white males. Everyone is subject to investigation, but those who fit the profile receive more attention.

But wouldn't it be possible that because of that other terrorists would be able to go through? As long as terrorists know that everyone will get treated the same, they will know that they don't stand a chance. But if we focus on one group more than on other, they will put extra effort into training terrorists that don't fit that group. [img]smile.gif[/img]
Oh, and why isn't McVeigh a valid argument? Didn't he blow up a building? Didn't people die? Maybe he didn't do it for the same reasons the terrorists in NY did, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for people like him. Well, that's at least how I feel. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 09-14-2002, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: Spelca ]

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Spelca: But wouldn't it be possible that because of that other terrorists would be able to go through? As long as terrorists know that everyone will get treated the same, they will know that they don't stand a chance. But if we focus on one group more than on other, they will put extra effort into training terrorists that don't fit that group. [img]smile.gif[/img] Oh, and why isn't McVeigh a valid argument? Didn't he blow up a building? Didn't people die? Maybe he didn't do it for the same reasons the terrorists in NY did, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for people like him. Well, that's at least how I feel. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Focusing on the group most likely to commit terrorist acts, while increasing the security on everyone seems reasonable to me. Again, the point is not to ONLY use security precautions against those profiled, everyone has to be looked at carefully.

McVeigh isn't a valid argument against profiling because no one is saying ONLY fanatical Muslim extremist are capable of, and desire to commit terrorist acts. He is as bad as anyone of the September 11th terrorists, but is he the exception or the rule?

My argument for profiling is that it doesn't make sense to ignore a group that is more likely to have those elements. John Walker Lindh was the American Taliban. He trained at Al-Queta training camps. He believed in their purpose, their mission, and agreed with their anti-American sentiment, but was he the exception or the rule.

[ 09-14-2002, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

There really can be no excuse not to use profiling for criminal aprehension. I have yet to see a real solid complaint for not using it....all I ever see is the "They might be offended" excuse which is just ludicrous.