Racial Profiling Report Wrong Doing

All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
 47 views
of 50

Please download to get full document.

View again

Description
Racial profiling is the suspicion of people based on race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or other immutable characteristics, rather than on evidence-based suspicious behavior. Racial profiling is often paired with potentially negative action. Although racial profiling is often associated with law enforcement policies and practices, it occurs in many different settings.
Share
Tags
Transcript
  Racial profilin(RAY.shul.profy.ling) is thuse of race asconsideration isuspect profilinor otherlaw enforcement practiceRacial Profiling is a form of racis consisting of the (alleged) policy policemen who stop and searc vehicles driven by persons belonginto particular racial groups. raciprofiling pp. Detaining, questioninor arresting a person  whose race ipart of a profile of traits that alleedly identify the most likelperpetrators of certain crime [n] a form of racism consistingthe (alleged) policy of policemen whstop and search vehicles drivenpersons belonging to particulracial groups. Under the narrodefinition, racial profiling occu when a police officer stopquestions, arrests, and/or searchsomeone on the basis of the person'race or ethnicity. Racial profilin(RAY.shul.proh.fy.ling) is theuserace as a considerationin suspeprofiling or other law enforcemepractices. Racial Profiling is a forof racism consisting of the (allegepolicy of policemen who stop ansearch vehicles driven by persobelonging to particular racial groupracial profilingpp. Detaininquestioning, or arresting a perso whose race is part of a profiletraits that allegedly identify thmost likely perpetrators of certaicrimes. [n] a form of racisconsisting of the (alleged) policy policemen who stop and searc nseraon n suspec prongm of racism consisting of theriven by persons belonging totioning, or arresting a personthe most likely perpetrators of policy of policemen who stopacial groups. Under the narrow ps, questions, arrests, and/or. Under the broader definition,.ling) is the use of race as a  WRONG   THEN, WRONGNOW  Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund Racial Profiling Before & After September 11, 2001  Executive Summary4Introduction7I.What is Racial Profiling?10II. Traditional Racial Profiling12 A. Forms of Traditional Profiling12B. The Myths Behind Traditional Racial Profiling17C. The Consequences of Racial Profiling19 III.Profiling and Terrorism21 A. Forms of Terrorism Profiling22B. Why Profiling is a Flawed Anti-Terrorism Tactic29 IV.The Need to Combat Profiling33 Recommendations33 Conclusion35Endnotes36 TABLEOFCONTENTS  Executive Summary This Report compares the practice of traditional street-level racial profiling with the post-September11 profiling of Arabs, Muslims, and South Asians. It concludes that profiling is just as wrong nowas it was before the war on terrorism began. The same arguments that led President Bush andAttorney General Ashcroft to condemn racial profiling before September 11 should lead them toabandon it now.In the months preceding September 11, a national consensus had emerged on the need to combatracial profiling. In the fearful aftermath of the terrorist attacks, some reevaluated their views. It is nowtime to dispel those doubts, reawaken the national consensus, and ban racial profiling in America.Racial profiling occurs when law enforcement agents impermissibly use race, religion, ethnicity ornational srcin in deciding who to investigate. Compelling anecdotal and statistical evidence demon-strates that minorities are disproportionately targeted by law enforcement. Pretextual traffic stops ofBlacks and Hispanics are common across the United States - the police frequently use race as a basis tosuspect that minorities violate the drug and immigration laws.Before September 11, polls showed that Americans of all races and ethnicities believed racial profilingto be both widespread and unacceptable. On February 27, 2001, President Bush told a joint sessionof Congress that racial profiling is wrong and we will end it in America. With the introduction ofthe bipartisan End Racial Profiling Act by Senator Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Representative JohnConyers (D-Mich.) on June 6, 2001, the enactment of comprehensive Federal anti-profiling legislationseemed imminent.On September 11, this consensus evaporated. The 19 men who hijacked airplanes to carry out thehorrific attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were Arabs from Muslim countries. Thefederal government immediately focused massive investigative resources and law enforcement attentionon Arabs, Arab Americans, Muslims, Sikhs, and South Asians. Many of the practices employed in thename of fighting terrorism - from the singling out of young Arab or Muslim men in the United Statesfor questioning and detention to the selective application of the immigration laws to nationals of Arabor Muslim countries - amount to racial profiling. But despite public hostility to street-level racialprofiling, anti-terror profiling has flourished.At the same time, there is new evidence that traditional racial profiling remains prevalent afterSeptember 11. The persistence of both forms of racial profiling makes clear the need to revive the pre-September 11 consensus that the practice of profiling is always wrong and should be prohibited. Chapter I of the Report defines racial profiling and provides illustrations of the practice. Blacks,Hispanics, Asians, and Arabs have all been victimized by unjustified racial and ethnic assumptionsand generalizations. 4 Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund  WRONG THEN, WRONGNOW  Racial Profiling Before & After September 11, 2001  The next two Chapters of the Report have parallel structures. Chapter II addresses traditional racial profiling - the reliance on race to investigate street-levelcriminal activity (especially drug crimes) and immigration violations. There are different forms of suchprofiling: disproportionate traffic and pedestrian stops of minorities; unwarranted searches of Blackfemales by the U.S. Customs Service; and the targeting of Hispanics by the Immigration andNaturalization Service. The evidence is clear: minorities have been unfairly singled out for lawenforcement attention. For example:ã A Department of Justice Report on police contacts with the public concluded that in 1999,African Americans were 20 percent more likely than Whites to be stopped and 50 percent morelikely to have experienced more than one stop. Police were more than twice as likely to searchan African American or Hispanic driver than a White driver.ã Data from the Los Angeles Police Department covering the period July to November 2002showed that 22 percent of Black drivers stopped by LAPD were asked to step out their cars,compared to only seven percent of White drivers stopped. Once out of their cars, 67 percentof Blacks were patted down and 85 percent subjected to a body search. Fifty-five percent ofHispanics removed from their cars were patted down and 84 percent searched. By contrast,only 50 percent of Whites stopped were patted down and 71 percent searched.Traditional profiling is fueled by the assumption that minorities commit more of the types of crimes thatprofiling is used to detect, e.g., drug crimes. In fact, statistical data from many jurisdictions shows theopposite: hit rates for minorities subjected to pedestrian and traffic stops, and to searches by theCustoms Service, are generally lower than hit rates for Whites. For example:ã According to the New York Attorney General's Report on NYPD's stop and frisk tactics, stopsof minorities were less likely to yield arrests than stops of Whites.ã According to a General Accounting Office report on U.S. Customs Service practices, while Blackfemale U.S. citizens were nine times more likely than White females to be x-rayed following afrisk or patdown, they were less than half as likely to be found carrying contraband. Traditional racial profiling is not only humiliating and contrary to core American values, it is alsoineffective as a law enforcement tactic. And the consequences of racial profiling are severe: profilingharms innocent people, skews the U.S. prison population, alienates minority communities, andcontributes to a crisis of confidence in the criminal justice system. Chapter III explores new forms of profiling in the anti-terrorism context: the emergence of a drivingwhile Arab version of driving while Black ; detaining and deporting Arabs and Muslims who areuninvolved in terrorism; and the singling out of young Arab men for questioning based on nothing 5 Executive Summary
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
Chilling Adventures of Sabrina S01 1080p NewStudio (Wanterlude) | MFC Miku_ | Smoke Grinder Herb Aluminum Hand Crank Herbal Tobacco Grinders Muller 4-layer