Racial Profiling Term Paper

Racial profiling is a popular method used by law officers in order to hypothetically enhance crime prevention by targeting minorities, because they are more likely to commit a crime. According to Wikipedia, racial profiling is defined as: the inclusion of race in the profile of a person considered likely to commit a particular crime or type of crime. In other words, it is targeting specific ethnic groups because they are more likely to commit certain crimes. Racial profiling is a flagrant form of racism. According to Dictionary.com, racism is defined as hatred or intolerance of another race or other races. Nevertheless, it shouldn't be confused with stereotyping, because they are two different things even if racial profiling is heavily inspired by racial stereotypes. But why would law officers use such a discriminating approach? Racial profiling, in some cases can lead to police brutality or in extreme cases, murder such as Amadou Diallo's case, who died in february 1999 after he was shot 41 times in front of his Bronx house by for cops, who were later acquitted

of all charges.

Racial Profiling has been around for years and quite frankly, I don't see it fading away any time soon because it is practiced in many parts of the world and thus cannot be prevented. Being racially profiled can happen to anyone no matter the race or gender. According to an article called "Chief Moose on Racial Profiling" published in October 2004, Chief Moose, a black officer, once got arrested simply because he was black and gives his opinion about it:" I love this country," he said. "I stayed out of jail, I got a good job, a doctorate degree and leadership positions. Yet still this happens to me because of the color of my skin... It's hard to respond nonviolently and seek legal remedies."

Racial profiling is just one example of how minorities are still victims of unfair treatment under a variety of institutions throughout the world. Here are some arguments that make the claim that racial profiling is morally wrong. According to the article entitled "The Secret Ambition of Racial Profiling", published in the Yale Journal in November of 2005,one of the authors, Banks, claims that "the empirical [argument] that racial profiling is unjustified because blacks and Latinos are no more likely than whites to commit drug crimes." This empirical argument also supports the related claim that racial profiling "is not, in fact, a sensible crime fighting tool.

Let us see racial profiling under Deontology. It would be immoral for a number of reasons. First, because minorities are being used as a means to an end to prevent crime since they are supposedly more likely to commit a punishable offence in the first place according to my graph. Second, according to the categorical imperatives utilized by Kant, one of the moral standards to consider here would be the Universalization Principle.

This would lead us to apply the preposition that racial profiling should be applied in every country. I don't believe that 6 billion people would engage in racial profiling at any given time, whether it be police officers arrested to black guys standing next to each other because they smell like weed and have a strong suspicion that they have more drugs on them, or a clerk in a small boutique monitoring two black girls because she suspects them of shoplifting while leaving white customers to wonder around the store freely. Since nobody would agree to apply this preposition universally, it should be considering morally wrong.

Under to the principal of the "Veil of ignorance", people would accept a position of initial equality, one where no one knows his or her place in society. Let's bring up a hypothetical situation. I am a muzlim from the middle East. I have worked in the clothing industry my whole life. One day I take the plane from country A to country B. When I get off the plane, my luggage's are ceased and I am taking away from the rest of the passengers simply because I have a long beard, fit the description of what the authority of country B calls a terrorist and for no other reason than my skin color. What if one of the people that took me aside in country B would come to my country and he would be considered as a slave? Under the ethical theory known as the "Veil of Ignorance", every person in society has the right to equal freedom. Also if there is an inequality in society, it must be to everyone's advantage. Since racial profiling violates a person's freedom, the violation benefits no one, therefore racial profiling should be considered immoral.

One way of trying to eliminate racial profiling, would be through extensive data collection because it is beneficial on many fronts. According to http://www.racialprofilinganalysis.neu.edu/background/, data collection gives the following benefits:

Ð'* Send a strong message to the community that the department is against racial profiling and that racial profiling is inconsistent with effective policing and equal protection

Ð'* Build trust and respect for the police in the communities they serve

Ð'* Provide departments with information about the types of stops being made by officers, the proportion of police time spent on high-discretion stops, and the results of such stops

Ð'* Help shape and develop training programs to educate officers about racial profiling and interactions with the community

Ð'* Enable the development of police and community dialogue to assess the quality and quantity of police-citizen encounters

Ð'* Allay community concerns about the activities of police

Ð'* Identify potential police misconduct and deter it, when implemented as part of a comprehensive early warning system

Ð'* Retain