Potential Suspects for Crime - Case Study Example

Racial Profiling: Legalized Discrimination An often used tool by the police is referred to as criminal profiling in which police identify potential suspects for crime based on various criteria. This concept progresses to racial profiling when the defining characteristics comprise ethnicity, religion or race. The horrific terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 left an ineradicable mental image in the minds of people worldwide and changed many aspects of life in America not the least of which is the moral, ethical and legal debate regarding the concept of racial profiling. The government and various agencies such as the transportation industry, as a response to possible future terrorist attacks, has led an anti-terrorism campaign focused on identifying people of Arab descent extending even to people of the Muslim faith and those who appear to be of Middle Eastern origin. This is a poor excuse for singling out individuals from the crowd and defies the values upon which this nation was built. Since the World War II era and especially following the Cold War years, American citizens have grown accustomed to living their life free of threats from abroad. However, that national feeling of security was obliterated along with the twin towers in New York. Because of this, security officials at the airport can rationalize the profiling of passengers. Statistically speaking, a male boarding a plane that appears to be of Arab descent has, however infinitesimally, a higher probability of being a terrorist. Airport security is based on very minute statistical probabilities. Since the objective of airport security is to prevent terrorists from boarding planes, it is understandable that, at least since 9/11, they have a greater interest in persons who appear of Arab descent than those of other ethnic groups. It can be argued that the generalization of persons based on stereotypical characteristics is sometimes necessary and can be rationalized based on statistics. For example, if an explosive device has been reported being carried by a person on a plane full of passengers, when security officials board the plane looking for this person, they do not have time to consider the morality implications of stereotyping and generalizations (Leadership Conference, 2002: 202). It’s not considered racism because it is not based on hatred of the race, but still is not morally or legally justifiable in a nation that values personal rights and the freedoms of individuality. The term ‘War on Terror’ has been continually invoked to justify breaches of the Constitution as well as the basic civil liberties of citizens and foreigners alike. The invocation of this phrase has repeatedly prohibited rational discussions regarding civil injustices such as profiling individuals based on their race. The not-so-subtle insinuation is that “one cannot condemn racial profiling because to do so will hinder the war on terrorism and undermine national security” (McDonald, 2001). The popularly stated position is that racial profiling is a necessary law enforcement tool. Not using it would compromise the effort against terrorism thus sacrificing national security. This argument is fundamentally flawed because it erroneously presupposes that racial profiling is an essential element of this emotion-evoking endeavor. However, the reverse is accurate. Profiling, as a tactic employed by law enforcement, redirects important assets, estranges and enrages prospective allies and, most importantly, is contradictory with the uniquely American concept of equality and freedom. Undoubtedly, if profiling in the name of terrorism has not been proved effective, the profiling of black citizens in the name of ‘getting tough on crime’ is not effective as well and causes more harm, ultimately, than whatever good may come of it. “Racial profiling in any manifestation is a flawed law enforcement tactic that is in direct conflict with constitutional values” (McDonald, 2001). There is no conclusive evidence that proves either way if the profiling of suspected terrorists is effective in safeguarding U.S. citizens. What is known is that the majority of U.S. residents, legal or not, of every racial group is not involved in terrorist activities and was alarmed by the September 11 attacks. Consequently, harassing, detaining or intruding on the liberty and privacy of individuals who are of a certain ethnic group will undoubtedly cause a certain amount of personal detriment to countless numbers of people who haven’t caused any reason to justify such an intrusion. The reality of the situation will not totally convince those persons who argue that profiling is effective and helps keep the public safe. Unlike illegal drug trafficking which involves large numbers of U.S. citizens of all ethnicities, there is every reason to assume that very few people in the U.S. are engaged in terrorist activities or are planning attacks. Hence, “any criteria police use to identify or ‘profile’ terrorists, whether or not those criteria rely on suspect classifications such as race, ethnicity, or national origin, will yield many more false positives than they will disclose true conspiring murderers” (Colb, 2001). Simply put, the overwhelming majority of ‘suspected terrorists,’ as determined by the parameters set by the standards of racial profiling, are innocent, law-abiding citizens by whatever the criteria used. Decisions regarding what person to hire, which people will be admitted and who will be detained by airport security as their suitcase is ransacked while they are trying to catch a plane is based upon characteristic generalities that are either observable or perceived. However, even when generalizations are statistically legitimate, they can be very erroneous in particular cases. Racial profiling is, by anyone’s definition, a rational method of discrimination. While most would have agreed prior to September 11 that racial discrimination is morally wrong and cannot be justified for any reason, those following the tragic events which killed more than 3000 Americans and the continued threat of terrorism has made this practice more palatable and even desirable. Had the terrorists that committed these acts not been of Arab descent, then the profiling of airplane passengers and the widespread fear of this particular ethnic group would not be a matter of discussion. Profiling Arabs is an easy sell to a country made up principally of non-Arabs. Following the Oklahoma City federal building bombing in 1995, there was no public outcry to profile white men. Virtually all persons of Arab descent who are detained at airports, kicked-off airplanes, have their bags searched or are looked at with suspicion almost everywhere they go are not terrorists. Discrimination, no matter how it can be rationalized, causes the victimization of certain minority groups. It leads to malicious stereotyping and generalizations regarding race, religion, gender, etc. which civil liberty loving Americans have decided is morally reprehensible. It does not matter if these generalizations are well-founded or if by not acting upon them results in a public safety concern. “The U.S. Code states clearly, ‘An air carrier or foreign air carrier may not subject a person in air transportation to discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex or ancestry,’ said Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, himself a victim of Japanese internment during World War II” (Leadership Conference, 2002: 204). Whatever the people of the U.S. decide on the question of racial profiling even during these fearful times of uncertainty and terror, generations that are yet to come may judge what we do now as reprehensible mimicking what those of us now think of past generations of Americans that thought it proper to imprison innocent Japanese-Americans in internment camps during the Second World War (Colb, 2001). Paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin, ‘those that sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.’ Perhaps Americans of all ethnicities should endeavor to exercise the moral responsibility that paves the way for the rights and freedoms we enjoy. Civil rights should be extended equally to all and not merely to certain groups at certain times. Works Cited Colb, Sherry F. “The New Face of Racial Profiling: How Terrorism Affects the Debate.” Find Law. (October 10, 2001). July 31, 2007 Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund. Wrong Then, Wrong Now: Racial Profiling Before & After September 11, 2001. (October 10, 2001). July 31, 2007 MacDonald, Heather. “The War on the Police … and How it Harms the War on Terrorism.” Supra. Vol. 7, I. 16, (December 31, 2001). July 31, 2007 Rhoads, Anai. “Ethnic and Religious Profiling in America.” Global Research. (2002). July 31, 2007 < http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/RHO211A.html> (The) White House. “President Issues Military Order Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism.” (November 13, 2001). White House Press Release: Office of the Press Secretary. July 31, 2007 Annotated Bibliography Colb, Sherry F. “The New Face of Racial Profiling: How Terrorism Affects the Debate.” Find Law. (October 10, 2001). July 31, 2007 Sherry Colb discusses the numerous issues surrounding the topic of racial profiling. Within this discussion, she defines what she means by the term, how it is justified, how it revokes the rights of citizens who are of the targeted race or religion and whether the profiling of potential terrorists is an effective means of identifying them. Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund. Wrong Then, Wrong Now: Racial Profiling Before & After September 11, 2001. (October 10, 2001). July 31, 2007 This paper details the various elements of racial profiling before and after the September 11 attacks, with particular focus on how it changed after the attacks. In addition to detailing why racial profiling did not work before the attacks, when it was applied primarily to black people in urban areas, it also discusses the proven consequences profiling has had in these areas and makes the assumption that these same negative consequences will manifest themselves in applying racial profiling techniques to the Arab community. MacDonald, Heather. “The War on the Police … and How it Harms the War on Terrorism.” Supra. Vol. 7, I. 16, (December 31, 2001). July 31, 2007 Heather MacDonald provides the other side of the argument regarding racial profiling. She points out fallacies in the ways statistics have been read that suggest racial profiling is harmful rather than helpful or that police pull over more black people than white. Although she is discussing mostly the question of black racial profiling among American citizens, her arguments remain valid in terms of debunking, or attempting to debunk, the claims made regarding the effects of racial profiling on a population. Rhoads, Anai. “Ethnic and Religious Profiling in America.” Global Research. (2002). July 31, 2007 < http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/RHO211A.html> This article briefly addresses the issues that have emerged in recent years since Arab racial profiling has been officially sanctioned. According to Rhoads, profiling has expanded not just to the color of skin, but also to religious institutions, increased the level of hate crimes and is destined to repeat many of the mistakes of the past, such as the treatment of the black people or the rounding up of anyone of Oriental descent following the bombing of Pearl Harbor. (The) White House. “President Issues Military Order Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism.” (November 13, 2001). White House Press Release: Office of the Press Secretary. July 31, 2007 This is the order issued by the President that fully authorizes all law enforcement personnel to use racial profiling methods in targeting individuals to be detained for further questioning, more invasive screening and deeper investigations. Outline Introduction: Racial profiling is the practice of identifying potential criminals based on defining characteristics that comprise ethnicity, religion or race. September 11 made us all more accepting of racial profiling. Racial profiling has erroneously judged numerous people who have had nothing to do with terrorism. Thesis statement: This is a poor excuse for singling out individuals from the crowd and defies the values upon which this nation was built. Body 1: September 11 September 11 was the first time in living memory that America has had to fear attacks from outside its borders on American soil. People have used the attacks as a justification for increasing security measures whenever a person of Arab descent attempts to board a plane. Statistics indicate people of Arab descent are slightly more likely to be terrorists than people of other descent. Nevertheless, the practice still infringes on the basic rights of American citizens as evidenced in the banning of peaceful religious leaders from boarding their flight because they were praying prior to take-off, something most Americans of every religious persuasion have been doing for several years now. Body 2: Discussion halted The ‘War on Terror’ has halted all criticism of racial profiling in favor of supporting the war. Racial profiling is determined to be an essential tool in the war on terror. In fact, racial profiling has created additional problems in our relations with others in terms of race and nationality. That racial profiling actually causes problems has been proven in our relations with black American citizens. Body 3: The Proof There is no hard proof that racial profiling does work to prevent terrorism just as there is no proof that it doesn’t work. Most US citizens are not engaged in terrorist activity. Profiling causes detriments to innocent people in the form of detainment, harassment and other punitive measures as it causes numerous ‘false positives’ that take time, effort and finances to clear. Body 4: The Long-Term Effects of Profiling Before 9/11, most people felt racial profiling to be an inherently wrong practice that infringed upon the principles on which this country was founded. 9/11 and the subsequent fear-mongering that occurred through the news media has changed many peoples’ minds about racial profiling when it is applied to Arabs. This change was brought about because it was Arabs, rather than white people, who caused the planes to crash. Racial profiling thus leads to victimization of a large portion of the population for the hostile actions of a few. Conclusion Racial profiling has loosened our responsibilities to uphold the moral and ethical values on which our country was founded. It allows us to subjugate and victimize portions of the population based solely on their race, a practice that was deemed illegal, immoral and reprehensible when it was applied to black people in the south in the 1960s. If we wish to retain our rights as American citizens, we need to extend the same rights to Arabs that we would expect to receive ourselves. Read More