Most people maintain that you can't judge a person based on race. However, I believe that while it shouldn't be used as a device/evidence in a trial, profiling has its uses. According to Wikipedia (which is a vaild source), although African Americans -- which will from now on be referred to by me as blacks -- account for only ~13% of the U.S. population (2008), they make up ~40% of the federal prison population (2009). On average, a black person is [i]six times more likely to go to prison in his/her lifetime[/i]. So out of 1,000 people:
-130 are black, 4 (3%) are currently imprisoned
-870 are non-black, 4 (0.5%) are currently imprisoned
25% of blacks will go to prison in their lifetime.
So the problem is, racial profiling and other stereotypes are often based on fact. My question to you is: "Are racial profiling and other stereotypes completely bad?"
The prison example is a BAD example, because one could say that it is BECAUSE they are black that they were sentenced to prison time rather than some lighter sentence.
I would say that profiling based on what country someone is from is more accurate than racial profiling, and their culture more so than the country. Based on their culture, one can make a pretty good guess as to what values have been (at least attempted) instilled in him. If those values include violence against others for whatever reason, one can assume they are more likely to be violent than others. You can only assume though, it's guessing based on more incidences coming from people of that culture/country and shouldn't amount to anything more than keeping a closer eye on them than, for example, a little old granny from Canada.
racial profiling/stereotyping is bad.
The problem with sterotyping/racial profiling doesn't stem to if they are true or not, some sterotypes are true to some degree and others not, but the fact that people use them as their only point of reference to that group of people.
Take for example the the statistics in the OP, they are true but people tend to use them in a way that is harmful. A person sterotyping using those statistics would associate black with criminality, without looking into why those statistics are that way.
Here is a good Ted Talk that is on this subject and specifically about the danger of the "single story" which is really the core of how sterotypes are dangerous.
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ihs241zeg[/URL]
No person should have to be judged or treated differently for what other people of the same ethnic group have done; everyone is an individual.
[QUOTE=Chronische;41463075]The prison example is a BAD example, because one could say that it is BECAUSE they are black that they were sentenced to prison time rather than some lighter sentence.
I would say that profiling based on what country someone is from is more accurate than racial profiling, and their culture more so than the country. Based on their culture, one can make a pretty good guess as to what values have been (at least attempted) instilled in him. If those values include violence against others for whatever reason, one can assume they are more likely to be violent than others. You can only assume though, it's guessing based on more incidences coming from people of that culture/country and shouldn't amount to anything more than keeping a closer eye on them than, for example, a little old granny from Canada.[/QUOTE]
You have a good point. The prison example was used mostly because of the recent Trayvon Martin case.
Profiling and stereotyping is always bad, and it's most likely why so many black people are in prison. Profiling and stereotyping breeds racism, segregation and oppression.
[QUOTE=maximizer39v2;41462895]25% of blacks will go to prison in their lifetime.[/QUOTE]
Can I have a source on this?
It may be stereotyping but it's also demographics through geography.
Let us take a less touchy subject than race to discuss the issue.
Let's say an inordinate number of crimes in some unnamed neighborhood happen on Tuesday. Is it wrong to give extra scrutiny to all the people on Tuesday?
Yes it is and that's all there is to it. Judge based on what people do, not by some arbitrary attribute.
stereotyping is inevitable for humans. It is a human tendency to group things into generalized groups, in order to process information better. However, we must just be aware of the stereotyping that we are doing, and attempt to remove as much bias as possible.
It's never good to make wide generalizations about people though.
In effect, stereotyping is recognizing non-random correlations. It in no way is making a claim about causation.
racial profiling essentially has two problematic side. While it does in fact make some methods more effective, it creates an unnecessary burden on those members of society who are being profiled for things completely out of their control.
In a lot of ways its a direct breach of non-racism and discrimination from the state and state agencies.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;41474217]racial profiling essentially has two problematic side. While it does in fact make some methods more effective, it creates an unnecessary burden on those members of society who are being profiled for things completely out of their control.
In a lot of ways its a direct breach of non-racism and discrimination from the state and state agencies.[/QUOTE]
The key word here is unnecessary. If the goal is to be more effective in crime fighting than it is necessary.
Let me say also that I'm trying to play devils advocate here in order to actually have some sort of discussion.
Sure the thing is, sometimes what is effective is in direct breech of rights. Take for example the right to not have your mail opened and read without due process. (a bit bonkers with the NSA scandal but whatever).
It would be more effective if the government could read all mail of everyone at all times. They could take on some crime they couldn't otherwise, but they can't as it's in breach of rights.
Basically the state (here meaning country and country agencies and officials) have to sometimes act less effectively in order to protect rights.
One can't judge the motives of an individual based on statistics. Everybody is different. People need to learn to quit reading statistics in whatever stupid way they're reading them. Sure, one out of every four African Americans may go to prison, but that doesn't necessarily mean that one out of every four African Americans in a city on the east coast of America is going to go to prison, nor does it mean the same on the west coast.
It also doesn't mean that if you happen to know four African Americans, that one of them is destined to go to prison either.
Statistics in general are highly open to subjective interpretation, and that's why I don't like them. That's why racial profiling isn't reliable. Profiling would be effective in city- or county-wide statistics, focused less on regional statistics like state or country, and more on individual city or town statistics.
As someone currently studying Social Service work, I learn much about social structures and the mechanics of power and oppression. While concepts like 'oppression' and 'privilege' have become something of a running joke on the internet, because of certain parties on websites like Reddit and 4chan who use the words while having no idea what they mean, the problems that exist in society aren't taken all that seriously by this technologically-inclined generation.
Do not, however, let yourselves be deceived. While oppression against racial minorities in the West, and primarily in the United States, has somewhat abated since the early 20th century, it has by no means died out. It is very commonplace, but has adapted to become practically invisible - Only the statistics today are our proof - That, and the outbursts of certain indiscreet proponents of racist ideals.
Where you look at certain statistics that seem to indicate a trend with regards to a certain ethnicity - More blacks being in prison than whites, for example - many different factors need to be taken into account.
First, historical oppression of a certain race can leave scars that last for many generations, and we are not too far removed yet from the time of the Civil Rights movement - Or from the time of open slave ownership, for that matter. Rates of broken homes, poverty, crime, and domestic abuse may remain higher among those whose parents and grandparents were victims of systemic or open oppression than for those who have always had access to money, education, and opportunity.
Second - Systemic oppression is alive, well, and in force in the West today. It is not openly advertised, but whites still have access to better pay, better opportunity, and are given more respect today than people of color, and particularly blacks. A lot of people in the USA, for example, still distrust African-American and Carribean-American people, feeling intimidated by them, or attributing to them criminal tendencies. These stereotypes were created for two main reasons - For one, the poverty and discrimination forced on these minorities by society itself had forced some to resort to crime to survive, and the actions of a few became, as is human nature, attributed to the ethnic group as a whole by those too quick to generalize. Also, some people who have led sheltered lives in upper-class environs may feel alienated by certain cultural differences they do not understand.
Finally, and to get to the point, racial profiling is very, very detrimental, because it has no scientific basis in fact, and perpetuates damaging stereotypes. It is, in short, a vehicle of continuing systemic oppression against members of minorities.
It slightly bothers me that there is so much focus on the actual statistic that more blacks go to prison then whites, without even wondering why the societal problems exist in the first place to cause these numbers and what we can do to try and fix it.
[QUOTE=Conspirator;41549700]It slightly bothers me that there is so much focus on the actual statistic that more blacks go to prison then whites, without even wondering why the societal problems exist in the first place to cause these numbers and what we can do to try and fix it.[/QUOTE]
It slightly bothers me that people assume there's a link between that statistic and racism in the justice system. I don't believe I've ever seen an actual causal link proven.
I mean, the simplest explanation would be to say that blacks proportionally do more crime. (not BECAUSE they are black)
We don't assume the justice system is sexist for convicting more men than women.
[QUOTE=sgman91;41549909]It slightly bothers me that people assume there's a link between that statistic and racism in the justice system. I don't believe I've ever seen an actual causal link proven.
I mean, the simplest explanation would be to say that blacks proportionally do more crime. (not BECAUSE they are black)
We don't assume the justice system is sexist for convicting more men than women.[/QUOTE]
It slightly bothers me that you didn't read my post.
I didn't say there is racism in the justice system, and I wasn't even referring to the justice system in general. More black people go to prison then white people because more black people live in poverty. Where there is poverty crime is abundant.
But instead of starting the conversation of how to get more blacks out of poverty, we decide to debate whether racial profiling is a good thing or bad thing, when if we actually tried to fix the societal issues the causation of black people committing more crimes wouldn't exist.
[QUOTE=Conspirator;41550177]It slightly bothers me that you didn't read my post.
I didn't say there is racism in the justice system, and I wasn't even referring to the justice system in general. More black people go to prison then white people because more black people live in poverty. Where there is poverty crime is abundant.
But instead of starting the conversation of how to get more blacks out of poverty, we decide to debate whether racial profiling is a good thing or bad thing, when if we actually tried to fix the societal issues the causation of black people committing more crimes wouldn't exist.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I wasn't really arguing against you as much as adding to it. I just feel like there are so many unproven assumptions when it comes to anything to do with race that it's all but impossible to have an actual fact based discussion.
Although I do feel that the VERY common assumption of the higher number of blacks in prison being caused by a racist justice system blocks out any real discussion of the true issues at stake here.
I think the main reason profiling/stereotyping is bad is not because they're always untrue, but because they're not always true. Even if a group of people is more likely to act a certain way, not all of them will, and by judging all of them based on the reputation of some you're also wrongfully judging those among them that does not fit that reputation.
[QUOTE=sgman91;41550309]Sorry, I wasn't clear. I wasn't really arguing against you as much as adding to it. I just feel like there are so many unproven assumptions when it comes to anything to do with race that it's all but impossible to have an actual fact based discussion.
Although I do feel that the VERY common assumption of the higher number of blacks in prison being caused by a racist justice system blocks out any real discussion of the true issues at stake here.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/news/2170-new-study-by-professor-david-s-abrams-confirms[/url]
Only a single study but it's certainly something to take into account in addition to socio-economic circumstances.
To assume that the justice system is perfect and free of bias, including racial bias, is fantastical.
Where i work, i deal with about 10 ridiculously dumb and/or slow people every day(doesnt sound like much but i have a tolerance for most people, these are the people that are intolerable). these people usually consist of about 5 black people and 5 white people(an equal amount). now, caucasians make up 80% of canada and dark-skinned people make up around 5%, so that 5% has got some explaining to do.
related findings: arabs are dressed fancy and are really nice people.
now to the topic: racial profiling sounds morally wrong, and in a way it is, but the thing is, it's correct. because of the way the rest of the world handles race, we can profile that certain races would not have spent time in a certain area, and would not have the attributes of someone who did. for example, if a white person goes to a taliban-controlled area, he will most likely be shot and killed or raped. this leads to a lack of white people terrorists, because instead of being brainwashed theyre just killed, and they dont even want to go there anyway.
another fact: 100% of taliban extremists are muslim.
so, airport security does this: they scrutinize everyone, but then they eliminate the people that have next to no chance of being terrorists. this leaves races that aren't white or asian to be left out of the scrutiny(except someone who looks like they might be a white supremacist, those guys are on high alert), because there is no reason to remove the other races from your mental "is that guy a boomer" check.
what gets looked at more, is how someone acts or dresses. if a man is shaking and sweating, like he's scared, check that fucker out. if someone is dressed like a rich executive, chances are he doesn't want to die, and you can leave him on his way. if it's a family, let them be.
i don't see racial profiling as scrutinizing everyone in a certain race. i see it as scrutinizing everyone, and then letting your guard down on those who cannot possibly be a terrorist.
but of course every person should be given the same opportunities based on their actions, so outside of a "preventative measure screening" racial profiling has no place.
After thinking about it for some time now, I think that people should use racial/stereotyping to catch and prevent criminals from doing crime. Now I don't mean go arrest every single arab on a plane or every black male in an alleyway. What I mean is that instead of wasting time at airport security checkpoints to search a 80 year old white woman for bombs. The next thing that comes to mind is that people would call me racist and such for saying that a 80 year old [U]white[/U] woman is 100% innocent, because that isn't true. Obviously anyone can commit a crime but what is the probability that you are going to catch a suicide bomber at an airport if 1 in every 23 people that goes through you completely searched. Let's put it into organized terms, out of 100 people, person number 17 is the bomber, and every 15th person the checkpoint searches. Now let's say a 8 year old black girl goes through the checkpoint and sure enough she is number 30. They search her and for this demo, she comes clean. Nothing on her, next. Then one of the guards keeps remembering that number 17 looked sweaty and something was funny about him, but since he was of a race that could be presumed to be a terrorist, he lets him past because he is scared of being called a racist. A random search will not catch a criminal if anything it makes it easier to get away. If we focus on groups of people that have had previous incidents of terrorism and crime it makes it easier for law enforcement.
Of course now, I can just hear me being called a racist but I understand that it isn't fair to those races to be treated that way, especially when that person is innocent. I personally believe in treating everyone equal and the same, but under terms. If one person of that group does something and causes an uproar in law and protect, I say, sorry if one ruins it, then it ruins it for the rest. Now that can mean every single person who goes through is searched, but then if there are multiple times where this race, religion, or group does it again, I say make a focus point.
[QUOTE=cradboard;41571881]After thinking about it for some time now, I think that people should use racial/stereotyping to catch and prevent criminals from doing crime. Now I don't mean go arrest every single arab on a plane or every black male in an alleyway. What I mean is that instead of wasting time at airport security checkpoints to search a 80 year old white woman for bombs. The next thing that comes to mind is that people would call me racist and such for saying that a 80 year old [U]white[/U] woman is 100% innocent, because that isn't true. Obviously anyone can commit a crime but what is the probability that you are going to catch a suicide bomber at an airport if 1 in every 23 people that goes through you completely searched. Let's put it into organized terms, out of 100 people, person number 17 is the bomber, and every 15th person the checkpoint searches. Now let's say a 8 year old black girl goes through the checkpoint and sure enough she is number 30. They search her and for this demo, she comes clean. Nothing on her, next. Then one of the guards keeps remembering that number 17 looked sweaty and something was funny about him, but since he was of a race that could be presumed to be a terrorist, he lets him past because he is scared of being called a racist. A random search will not catch a criminal if anything it makes it easier to get away. If we focus on groups of people that have had previous incidents of terrorism and crime it makes it easier for law enforcement.
Of course now, I can just hear me being called a racist but I understand that it isn't fair to those races to be treated that way, especially when that person is innocent. I personally believe in treating everyone equal and the same, but under terms. If one person of that group does something and causes an uproar in law and protect, I say, sorry if one ruins it, then it ruins it for the rest. Now that can mean every single person who goes through is searched, but then if there are multiple times where this race, religion, or group does it again, I say make a focus point.[/QUOTE]
Problem with doing this is that the criminals are smart enough to exploit that. They'll shift their personnel accordingly. If you're, say, profiling Asians and leaving Whites untouched, they'll just use whitey to get their contraband past you. When you shift to profiling whitey and leaving Asians alone they'll go back to using Asians. If you profile both they'll start using blacks, and eventually you'll end up where you should have been from day one: Treating everyone equally.
Depending on the context, but for marketing it's used often and most of the time its fine but its all depends on the context.
Stereotyping is fine as long as you have something else to back you up as well
if you say "but he was black" then you're in the wrong
Racial profiling I feel is wrong when convicting someone based on stereotypes, not only because I feel it's immoral, but it's also very poor evidence to support a claim. Doing away with racial profiling completely, however, can compromise you depending on your job, especially when it's only used to adjust yourself to a situation.
I for example, work overnight exterior security at cheap motels in the rough neighborhoods of Little Rock. A little bit of racial profiling here and there just within the mind can help adjust myself in confrontational situations. For example, we try to make sure people are in their rooms by 11:00 PM and not wandering the lot. This is to prevent loitering, people partying and non-guests joining in and preventing harm to the guests, which again, is because of the crime in the area. Repetition has taught me that white people protest the most to this rule and often either get angry, or try to get buddy-buddy with you to gain favors and circumvent the rule, so failing in the friendly approach numerous times, before confronting a white person, I have to adjust to being firm, but fair with them, getting across that you're here to do a job and not make friends.
With black guys, it's a bit easier. Ones in this area in particular tend to have a high persecution complex based on their race, so before confrontation, I put on a more friendlier demeanor to avoid this problem. Regardless of how intimidating quite a few of them look, their response to this is positive, and I actually have had a lot less trouble telling black people around here of the 11:00 PM rule, and often times they comply without issue.
[QUOTE=yumyumshisha;41472286]stereotyping is inevitable for humans. It is a human tendency to group things into generalized groups, in order to process information better. However, we must just be aware of the stereotyping that we are doing, and attempt to remove as much bias as possible.
It's never good to make wide generalizations about people though.[/QUOTE]
This is basically how I feel about the issue. I think we all do this to some degree, and it's important to just think about it instead of going with gut feeling. I have caught myself making quick, mental assumptions about people based on appearance, and when I do, I always correct myself. Sadly, people will always label and generalize other people. It's just important to recognize that these assumptions are ridiculous, and pass them off as such.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
