Racial Profiling - Coursework Example

Topic: Racial Profiling Identify the truths and myths surrounding racial profiling. Racial profiling, according to Croddy et al., is ing minority drivers to car and body searches, and causing humiliation by pulling them over for minor violations or no sufficient valid reasons. Christopher Darden, an African American and one time prosecutor, has faced the humiliation many times. He remarked that “to be pulled over for no good reason is very offensive. But then to be asked for consent to search your vehicle just ratchets things up another notch. And in those situations where you‘ve been forced at gun point or you‘ve been asked to spread out on the street, to lay out on the pavement, makes you boiling with anger.” According to Gallup poll conducted by Newport [1999], 42 percent of African Americans have been stopped by the police in comparison to 6 percent of European Americans. The racial profiling is sometimes more prominent with regard to “consent searches”, which is done due to the absence of visible proof of wrong doing, and the driver is asked to surrender for a voluntary search. Here also the Latino and Black motorists were stopped two to three times more than White motorists by the California Highway Patrol (Glaser, 2006). Racial profiling is of two types – full and partial. When race is the single reason of stopping a person by the police officer, it is full racial profiling, which is an illegal practice. It is against the constitution and proclaimed wrong by one and all. Partial racial profiling occurs when race is one of the many reasons of stopping; it is recommended by many as an effective law-enforcement mechanism (Croddy et al.). There are many myths and realities, which need to be identified on the issue of racial profiling before and after September 11, 2001. It is a myth that drug crimes are mostly committed by the minorities and racial profiling is a genuine reaction based on the pattern of criminal behavior and strategic method of nabbing the criminals. The reality is that drug crimes are committed by all irrespective of race. The Blacks and Hispanics commit crimes in less proportion to their population percentage in the US. For example as per the 2000 stats, African Americans count 12 percent of the US population but of the total illicit drug use they constitute only 11 percent. Same is with Hispanics who are 13 percent of the US population but only 10 percent are illicit drug users. While comparing drug use among Blacks and whites in the previous two decades, consistently it has been lower per capita in Black youths than White youths (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). Another myth is that profiling of minorities is done because excess drug is found in their possession than in the custody of Whites. Reality is that the drug possession and proof of wrong behavior lies with Whites as much as with Blacks while doing road searches. The “hit rates”, according to the Department of Justice survey in 1999, were higher of Whites than of Blacks, as drug was found in the possession of 17 percent of Whites in comparison to 8 percent Blacks. Another example of New Jersey from the state troopers also substantiates the fact that Whites-driven vehicles carrying drugs constituted 25 percent, Black-driven 13 percent, and Latino-driven 5 percent, as per 2000 figures of the department (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). Another myth is that racial profiling could be eliminated by terminating the rogue policemen who are few in number. It is not true; we cannot solve the problem of race-based profiling by weeding out wrong elements in the police department. In fact, the profiling has deep roots in the police culture; it is done methodically with the permission from senior officers. Changes at institutional level are needed to resolve the profiling issues and also at different platforms from local to federal (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). Another myth is related to change in focus from Blacks and Hispanics to Arabs and Muslims in the wake of September 11, 2001 air attack by the Muslim extremists from the Middle East. Actually Blacks and Hispanics are going through racial profiling as usual, which is clear from the 2002 traffic stop data from Los Angeles, Massachusetts, and Colorado. Actually, profiling has become extensive due to the reason that people might be Arabs and Muslims. Such profiling does not help in capturing the wrong-doers (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). It is a myth that we must stop attending to racial profiling and instead divert our attention to the most urgent task of identifying terrorists in Arab and Muslim population. Actual reality is that racial profiling is a wrong method of law enforcement that thwarts the necessary resources, isolates positive powers in the fight against terrorism, and stomps away precious notions of freedom and equality. It is evident from the memorandum circulated by the senior U.S. law enforcement officials in October 2002 named “Assessing Behaviors,” stressing that attending on racial features of people is a useless exercise that must be stopped, as it is coming in the way of putting efforts in collecting dependable proof of doubtful conduct of people who don’t possess a racial profile (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). It is a myth that interrogation of Arabs after the terror strike of 11 September helped in any way zeroing-in on actual suspects. In reality, the whole exercise of questioning 8,000 Arabs was futile, providing no clues of the suspects (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). Another myth relates to our basic principles in the matter of civil rights and fair treatment to all that come in our way to nab culprits among the Muslim and Arab population. Reality is different, and it is that human rights the world over are violated by putting severe limitations on the foreign nationals’ movements and activities, as well as profiling them. It had happened earlier when the mistake was made by interning thousands of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War. Constitutional values get trampled when you need to tackle an enemy not in your range of attack (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). It is a myth that the practice of racial profiling should let be continued keeping in mind the greater purpose of serving the citizens by saving the society at large from harmful elements roaming free although racial profiling is an agreed faulty way of law enforcement. In reality the tradition of racial profiling has caused more harm by loosing the confidence of the minorities in the U.S. system of law enforcement. A wrong notion of the criminal justice system develops in the racially ethnic and religious communities that it’s never a fair deal. Such happenings add to the well rooted belief in the minorities that the police will play the worst part in dealing with them. This thinking inhibits victims in minorities to side with the law enforcement agencies in witnessing and becoming judicious jurors. Racial profiling brings the danger of estranging away loyal communities that want to partner in the government efforts by helping in nabbing terrorists through crucial information sharing and translating (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund). 2) What action(s) is being taken today to remedy the issue? A series of actions need to be taken to remedy the issue of racial profiling. The Attorney General of the state of New Jersey in the interim report of 1999 has recommended conducting routine traffic stops in the most impartial way. An all-inclusive multi-purpose warning system needs to be developed to find problems and spy violations. Only true professionalism resulting in increased answerability can strengthen the system (Educational Seminars, 1999). Actions recommended are: A comprehensive drug enforcement strategy to guarantee effective, balanced, and efficient use of state resources by targeting on drug enforcement cases. Agencies involved should not unknowingly cut across one another ways. Effectiveness of highway interdiction methods need to be tested besides mapping the effectiveness of the use by policemen of the consent-to-search philosophy. The Department of Law and Public Safety should provide details to the public of stats given by the police regarding traffic stops of different communities, minority and non-minority, implicated in police actions As a remedial measure, an early warning system should be installed, which includes all possible means of feeding essential information into the automated computerized system about troopers to be zeroed-in who have shown unprofessional behavior. The whole new process on the totally new all-inclusive Standard Operating Procedure outlining means and criteria to be employed by the police department for conducting traffic stops should be developed. Criteria should also be developed for requesting permission to search and initiate consent searches. All consent search cases should be examined by the review team to find adherence to Standard Operating Procedures. Training programs should be revised to include new policies and distinct treatment of minorities to be fully imbibed in the police personnel on the traffic duty. Drug-detection canines brought on the scene of traffic stop should be equipped to measure the psychological reaction of the equipment on the persons going through the detection test. The process should take the minimum time required. Criteria need to be developed on the parameters of arresting in stead of issuing summons. Deputy Attorney-Generals and Assistant Prosecutors should be assigned duty by the Division of Criminal Justice 24 hours X 7 days to provide legal assistance to the troopers. A reporting mechanism should be developed to inform the court happenings to the police patrol on cases registered by them. The State Police should develop an inventory and impounding policy describing the conditions prompting examination of incapacitated vehicles. Any complaint of discriminatory practices should not be published until reviewed by the Division of Criminal Justice. Standard procedure and criteria should be observed by the state prosecutors following guidelines issued by the Division of Criminal Justice in managing law enforcement litigation where members of the police department are involved. New legislation must come into force to punish policemen found guilty of willful misconduct and bad behavior towards citizens, violating their civil rights. The Office of the Attorney General should take into confidence the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice to initiate surveying of the travelers, to be included into the early warning system for extra surveillance done by the policemen where it is hinted that the policemen have stopped a large percentage of minority motorists, as indicated by the automated audit of the early warning system (Educational Seminars, 1999). References Book Croddy, Marshall., Hayes, Bill., Clark, Tod. Chapter 7: The Limits of Police Authority: Racial Profiling. Criminal Justice in America. Third Edition. (pp. 98-99). Retrieved October 25, 2009. Educational Seminars. United States Department of Law and public Safety, State of New Jersey. (1999, April). New Jersey Attorney General issues a lengthy and controversial Report on racial profiling by state troopers (April 1999). Selected highlights of the interim report of the state police review team regarding allegations of racial profiling. Retrieved October 27, 2009, from http://www.aele.org/NJprofil.html Glaser, Jack. (2006). The efficacy and effect of racial profiling: a mathematical simulation approach. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25(2). Retrieved October 25, 2009, from www.interscience.wiley.com Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund. Racial profiling myths and realities. Wrong Then, Wrong Now: Racial Profiling Before and After September 11, 2001. Retrieved October 27, 2009, from http://www.nacdl.org/sl_docs.nsf/issues/racialprofiling/$FILE/RP_Myths_and_Realities_factsheet.pdf Read More