Racial Profiling - Term Paper Example

Racial profiling refers to a law enforcement that allows security officers to stop, search, or investigate people based on their ethnic, race, nationality, and religious backgrounds. Racial profiling as a war against terrorism has moral and security implications. Racial profiling is mostly committed among the minority ethnic and religious groups as a reaction to particular crimes. The implications of the policy are both positive and negative. The security of citizens has improved because of the adoption of this policy. However, the policy has raised ethical concerns because it allows segregation and biases against the minority groups; the policy is constitutional in America, but considered unethical. Ethical implications The racial profiling policy as a government activity directed on suspects of especially racial group has raised several ethical concerns both in America and in the rest of the world. The policy faces rejection from the advocates of equality in justice. Those rejecting racial profiling argue that the policy is unconstitutional and deprives equal treatment and protection of all people under one constitution. The policy allowed scrutiny and favoritism among different racial groups that exist in the America soil. Interviews conducted by law enforcement officials on foreigners’ especially foreign students in US colleges raised concerns on the moral issues. Following the December 2005 interviews on the students joining the US colleges, the local police chiefs reacted by resisting to cooperate with the federal officers terming the act as a violation of departmental policy and local state laws. The policy violates the civil and privacy rights of the passengers. The system requires the creation of stereotypes based on the existing information thus subjecting the communities such as the Arab and Muslim groups to scrutiny and suspicion. The Muslims group’s rights in America have been denied their equality right as American citizens based on the stereotyping policy raised by the racial profiling security system. Other than the Muslim communities, racial profiling focuses on black people as criminals rather than the victims of crime. The policy has underestimated the tendency of the white people to commit crimes the black people commit. This policy thus views the white people as victims of terrorism and ignores the poor blacks who are equally prone to terrorist attacks thus promoting the idea that blacks are immune to the terrorist attacks. The profiling policy promotes feelings of inferiority and superiority among the citizens of different colors. This raises the issue of racial discrimination from the people expected to be the guardians of equality codes. It violates the moral code that terrorism goes beyond racial groups; terrorism is intra-racial and not inter-racial. Subjecting the young black men into suspicions is inappropriate basing on the fact that both black and white races have equal chances of becoming terrorists. Law enforcement officers tend to focus on the blacks as perpetrators ignoring their chances of being victims. This ignores the general fact that the white people in US commit most crimes, which is relative to the size of the white people in the country. Racial profiling poses risks of injury and death. This is because the policy creates a stereotyping image among the law enforcement officers. Due to the internalized perception of the black people as dangerous for the security of the nation, the law enforcement officers apply cruel measures that go beyond the normal standards. These officers fail to follow the procedural justice by ignoring issues like arrest warrant. The police, as other people are fearful of the occurrence of terrorism, thus act violently on the people they know to be potentially prone to violence. The racial profiling is thus negative based on its ability to cause unjustified risks of harm and death on particular racial groups. Some experts maintain that the aggressive police stops to intercept terrorists, in most cases frighten the suspect and may result in injury on the suspect. The violence against the suspect takes the form of gunshots, rape, and even robbery in the name of promoting” zero tolerance” to terrorism. The moral question raised by advocates against racial profiling is whether the issue of races and ethnic groups determine terrorism. Racial profiling gives permission to law enforcement officers to promote racism in a world that is tackled by violence and racial segregation. The policy focuses on the physical traits that cause terrorism rather than the internal motives of individual. Racial profiling raises the philosophical l questions as to whether the high violations of rights based on color and ethnic groups will end terrorism acts. The hatred fueled by the racial profiling among citizens and nations brings the issue of equal rights to scrutiny. This discrimination poses a challenge to the modern justice tenets and human rights. Many scholars argue that racial profiling is a breach of justice and human rights; it violates ethical codes of equality and justice for all people (Glover, 2009). Implications on the homeland security Evaluation of the homeland security approaches a pluralistic approach. However, this article will analyze the implications of racial profiling on homeland security. Racial profiling has influenced homeland security positively. The policy is applied in America since the attack launched by the Japanese on the Pearl Harbor when the Attorney General ordered the drawing of maps that showed all the Japanese owned property that included lands. The district Attorney Generals enforced the Alien Land and Law that promoted the exclusion of Japanese from land ownership and general freedom in America as a way of promoting the safety of the citizens. The horrific acts of September 11 indicated the place of ethnicity in the terror attacks. The various investigations carried by homeland security professionals indicate that there exist a correlation between crimes committed and the ethnic and racial origin of the perpetrator. Racial profiling, therefore, became a cheap and efficient way of launching a war against terrorism attacks. Immediately the law enforcers realized the correlation between the crime and backgrounds; they embarked on the procedures that sought investigate people based on their backgrounds. The racial profiling in US affects the people from the Arab origin. This is based on the historical attacks associated with the Muslim and Arab American groups. Many young of Arab decent were engaged in the suicide bombings in the American soil. Nineteen of the terrorists involved in the September 11 terrorist attack and those who participated in the bombing that took place World Trade Center are reported to be having the traces of the Arab origin. The ages of these bombers range between 15 and 30 years. The history of attacks by bombers from the Arab origin makes the natural appearance of any Arab causes fear among the Americans. This explains the attitude held by the law enforcers towards the Muslim and the Arab community at large. The attorney general in California State established anti-terrorism information Centre that aimed at analyzing the thousands of foreigners as a way of dealing with the suspicions of terrorism raised by the law enforcers. The center reported enormous achievements since its time of invention. In 2001, the center reported that out of 1,615 foreigners investigated, 238 had criminal histories while 330remained under investigations. The information gained from this center became inspirational in fighting terrorism. The racial profiling system helps in banning the potential terrorists in the country and the rest of the world. Other that the terrorism information center, the US Congress passed the USA Patriot Act that promotes racial profiling permitting the Attorney General to detain without trial aliens that prove to be a threat to the national security. The mission of this law is to combat both external and domestic terrorism. The policy deterred the freedom of Israeli Arabs. The El Al policy of signaling young Arabs for extensive search is one of the strategies used by law enforcement officers to counter the Israeli terrorists (Cauley and Eric, 1988). Racial profiling has improved the airport security measures in matters regarding terrorism attacks. Profiling passengers in the airport helped to reduce the chances of entry of dangerous items that can cause mass destruction. This indicates that when profiling is used as a weapon against the hijacking will help in the reducing the cases of plane hijacking. Additionally, profiling of the young Muslims in America especially in New York sub highways has helped as a defensive mechanism against counterterrorism. The F.B.I agents engage the targeted Muslims on interviews as well as the Arab Americans in order to gain some intelligence information concerning terrorism and general security of the country. This implies that the suspected groups have a correlation with the criminal issues facing the country. Profiling of these suspects has helped in the detection of terrorist acts and incapacitation of the terrorists’ plans on attacks (Enders, and Sandler, 1993). The levels of racial profiling determine the terrorism occurrences in the community. The racial profiling implemented in USA in 1973 made significant impacts in 1975 when US detected 46,318 knives and 4,738 firearms. This detection was significant because it prevented about 35 potential hijacking thus reducing the domestic hijacking to only six. However, the criminals never stopped attacking despite these screenings. The impact of the screening provided room for immediate detection of the planned attacks and gave the terrorists difficult time in seeking escape ways thus lowering the frequency of terrorist occurrence. The US policy on homeland is imperative. Berenson argues that profiling helped to reduce terror attacks. He adds that when need for screening arises; the blacks are the first to be screened followed by a brother with hijab. He adds that constant profiling on the blacks and Muslims has led to collapse in terrorism cases in, America. According to Berenson, the voice of the Muslim is the terrorist voice (Glover, 2009). Homeland functions a means of ensuring national security by combating the terrorist attacks. The approach on the war on terror suggests to the public that political and religious violence is yet to be curbed. The weapon used by homeland security that has proved effective in terror compartment is the racial profiling. Racial profiling though may seem rude and torturing remains effective in combating terrorists from known nationalities and races. Just war The philosophical question on the justification of wars preoccupied the minds of early scholars and philosophers. The terrorist attacks on USA in2001 forced the scholars to focus more on the tenets that define a just war. Since then, just war theories became general in determining international and national relationships. The major tenets of a just war are found on the war’s motives and implications. A war qualifies to be just if it occurs as the last resort in solving the impending challenge. A war is just if it is declared by the right authority, with good intention and having the chances of success in a proportional measure. These principles imply that the war declared on terrorists is justified. War as the last solution implies that all other available solutions failed to solve the situation. This is because war effects are hazardous and thus should only be declared as the last alternative and if the costs or the repercussions are manageable (Brooks, 2013). The principle of proper authority states that the war is just if it is declared by the by the sovereign power of the state. This also implies that the sovereign or the state should be just in its actions in order for its declaration to qualify as a just war. This principle excludes wars declared by great leaders like Nazi of Germany invasion of France in 1940. Theorists like Hobbesian and Lockean argue that as long as the state is not tyrannical, corrupt or poorly accountable, its declaration of the war is justified. Additionally, they argue that the notion of proper authority includes the existence of a proper relationship between the state and its citizens. The principle of right motives is crucial in justifying war. The principle suggests that the reasons for waging war should aim at promoting justice rather than self-interests. According to Kant, possession of good reasons constitutes the moral principles of war. He adds that good intentions include the desire for peace and safety of those defended. A country waging war to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks or to secure what is best for the country is justified. Other defining principle of just war includes the high chances of success in solving the problem. Presidents Winston Churchill and Finns exemplified in the success when they declared wars that aimed at safeguarding the national self-esteem. The last principle includes the use of justifiable means. This includes following the proper war guidelines that will minimize destructions. Conclusion Terrorism has become a common phenomenon in the modern world. It is a treat to the world at large. Several nations have developed strategies to detect and prevent terrorist attacks. Homeland professional developed racial profiling policy to allow law enforcement officers investigate people based on their racial, religious, ethnic, and historical backgrounds. The system raised several ethical concerns as many people reject it as unethical. The policy has positive impacts on the security because the security personnel could access information without spending a lot of resources. References Banks, R. Richard. (2001). Race-Based Suspect Selection and Colorblind Equal Protection Doctrine and Discourse, 48 UCLA Law Reviews 1075. Brooks, T. (2013). Just war theory. Cauley, Jon and Eric I. Im. (1988). “Intervention Policy Analysis of Skyjackings and Other Terrorist Incidents,” American Economic Review 78:27—31. Enders, Walter and Todd Sandler. (1993). “The Effectiveness of Antiterrorism Policies: A Vector-Autoregression Intervention Analysis,” American Political Science Review 87: 829-44. Glover, K. S. (2009). Racial profiling: Research, racism, and resistance. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield. Read More