Racial Profiling Pros And Cons

In the Justice System there are a lot of flaws that affect many people of color, and from past history, it has shown how these practices can lead to very unfortunate events, one of these practices is racial profiling. Racial profiling is when law enforcement uses race and ethnicity as grounds to determine if someone, typically of color, is guilty of doing something illegal. Racial profiling is a major problem in this country, this as well affects many citizens that are mainly of color because law enforcement usually sees them as targets, and it is important to improve and fixed this issue because there are many tragic incidents that have been caused of racial profiling.

The practice of targeting individuals for police investigation based on their race alone in the last few years has been an increasingly prominent issue in American society. Numerous magazines, newspapers, and journals have explored the issue of race-motivated police actions. Recently, the ABA Journal did a study of New Jersey and Pennsylvania traffic stops from 1998 to 2001, concluding that black drivers were more likely to be pulled over and arrested than whites. The study also delves into the legal ramifications of the 1996 United States Supreme Court ruling in the Whren v. United States case, which held that police officers subjective motivation for stopping a motorist on the

The judicial system in America has always endured much skepticism as to whether or not there is racial profiling amongst arrests. The stop and frisk policy of the NYPD has caused much controversy and publicity since being applied because of the clear racial disparity in stops. Now the question remains; Are cops being racially biased when choosing whom to stop or are they just targeting “high crime” neighborhoods, thus choosing minorities by default? This paper will examine the history behind stop and frisk policies. Along with referenced facts about the Stop and Frisk Policy, this paper will include and discuss methods and findings of my own personal field research.

On a legal level, many authorities and people agree that racial profiling is a common and inappropriate issue that needs to be prohibited. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, “racial profiling violates the constitutional requirement that all persons be accorded equal protection of the law” (Lawson, Henderson, and Chanin 2011). On top of that, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that racial profiling is illegal and unjust since it discriminates one group against others (Lawson et al. 2011). The issue receives legislative attention because it is among locals and police - the representatives of authorities that are supposed to protect and serve their people. In a 1999 Gallup Poll, the poll result indicated that 77 percent of African Americans and 56 percent of Caucasians believed that racial profiling was widespread and unacceptable (Lawson et al. 2011). Racial profiling seems to be ubiquitous and has found its way to stay as a problem in the U.S. society. In 2007, a third-year evaluation report sponsored by the City of Cincinnati has, once again, recorded and analyzed one of the most common forms of racial profiling - stops made by

Can we stop the unjust practice of racial profiling? Is it correct for Police Officers to stop a black driver for an alleged traffic offense to question and sometimes search the black driver? These questions provoke the need to understand racial profiling and racism along with what problems are involved and the possible solutions. Doesn't the use of race make sense? Isn't it really just good police work? The guarantee to all persons of equal protection under the law is one of the most fundamental principals of our democratic society. Our government must continue to evaluate the facts and take appropriate action to resolve this controversial issue.

Racial profiling is an example of police brutality, which is defined by Gross and Livingston (2002) as “the practice of some officers of stopping motorists of certain racial or ethnic groups because the officer believe that these groups are more likely than others to commit certain types of crimes” (p.1413). Therefore, individuals are treated unfairly by law enforcement solely based on their race. This type of mistreatment is unmerited and ultimately a violation of an individual’s rights. However, in many instances the courts do not find it a violation of their civil rights based on the fact that racial profiling is difficult to prove. Often, prosecutors are disinclined in bringing forth a case against officers on this particular matter. Officers are permitted to stop and search individuals and their vehicles whenever there is reasonable suspicion, however, there has been studies that prove that some law enforcement officers restrict these rights primarily to minority groups. Bowling and Phillips found that although there was no formal monitoring of use of these powers, it was concluded that it was particularly heavy use of these powers against ethnic minorities, largely of young black people (as cited in Sharp & Atherton, 2007, p. 747) . In several cases, officers argue that they reasonably pulled an individual over for other probable grounds such as: traffic violations, suspicious behavior, etc., with race never being an

Some say that racial profiling is a tactic that is very much needed to help officers with investigations. Racial profiling is actually unconstitutional because the fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches. The fourth amendment also sets out requirements for search warrants based on probable cause. The court case United States v. Brignoni-Ponce confronted the issue of race as being a factor to the suspicion of criminal activity. The officer that stopped the respondent's car said it was “ the apparent Mexican ancestry of the occupants.” This belief that the occupants were illegal immigrants did not satisfy the court and they ruled the case as violating the fourth amendment.

Apart from periodically publishing stop and search records, supervisors and managers of police force are now required to closely monitor such statistics and take timely actions if something wrong is being observed. Also stricter rules on stop and search have since been imposed, along with the requirement of police officers writing a detailed report on spot about every single incident which subjects to review seems helpful in improving police conduct (Fyfe 1979; Skogan and Frydl 2004 in Miller 2010). While stop and search practice has been somehow improved, racial discrimination can still be seen in stop and search statistics. The notion of “Black and minority ethnic groups, particularly black people, have for many years been disproportionately at the receiving end of police stop and search—a fact associated with profound community resentment towards the police” (Bowling and Phillips 2002 in Miller 2010) still largely applies today. Miller’s (2010) analysis indicate that black people are about 6 times more likely to be stopped and searched, while it is about 2 times more likely for Asians. Similar idea is seen in Bennetto’s (2009) report, which draws on police statistics that shows in 2009 “black people are seven times more likely to be stopped and searched than white”, worse than Miller’s analysis with the most recent figures in 2008. No official explaination is provided by Police, but Bennetto (2009) assumes this may be caused by simply discrimination of

How often have you immediately made a decision about someone based solely on the color of their skin? Since the September 11 bombing, many people have been targeted by police because of their skin tone. This is called racial profiling, it has become a major problem that many in this country must deal with daily (ACLU, 2017). Even though this is very unconstitutional, implementing a change can be a very challenging thing. Later, I will be telling you about some individual’s stories of racial profiling, why this has become such a problem and how we could change this problem.

Many racial profiled victims walk away with minor traffic tickets, too often are unlucky and their outcome is death. Some law enforcers seem to have the stereotypical idea that all african americans are ignorant and poor. In relations to that if seen differently then that will arouse suspcion to the law enforcer because it is so called unheard to see a blcak man with a nice car. Theres even an actual story where that has happened "On Oct 12, 1995, Johnny Grammage , a 31 yr old african american male was shot and killed after being pulled over while driving the jaguar of his cousins". That is just despicable an officer is only allowed to use a weapon if his life was in danger or if he had weapon but in this case neither was true. Racial profiling does not only affect race but it also affects religion. In most recent research " In South Dakota there is a widespread reports of racial profiling led to hearings before the state legislature, where indians testified about being stopped and searched not only based on race but religion" the constitution does foucs on that too whereas where we a free right to practice and not be judged. A suspect should not be searched or even stopped because of their race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, and orgin. They should be detained because of a logical and ethical reason if not then their only making them another victim of racial profiling. Bringing back up this term again

With so much going in the racial profiling world, could there be a solution to this enormous problem? Well, in California there is movement among the policymakers to ensure that police officers collect data on motorist that’s pulled over and within that date to inform of race and ethnicity. This could be a step forward or a step back. If this proposal is pushed the con to this is the additional paperwork the police officer would

Is it right to racial profiling someone? Many people did this to other .but i think its wrong because we all human and same no matter how different our race and skin color.

Racial profiling is when someone’s race is used by law enforcement to assume criminal suspicions (Spagnoli, Filip). Law enforcement has used racial profiling to “help” prevent criminal activity. For instance, a survey done by the department of justice when officers focused more on African-American and Latino drivers they found that less of them had drugs the when they least focused on white drivers (The Truth About Racial Profiling: FIVE FACTS). Some officers assume that Hispanics and African-Americans are carrying around illegal substances and weapons. This is not always true! As the survey revealed, most of the people who did have prohibited items were white Americans. Law enforcement should begin stopping drivers by suspicion not by their race. In another survey done by Ian Ayres and Jonathan Borowsky they had found very similar information. “We also found that, once people were stopped, officers were more likely to frisk, search, or arrest African-Americans and Latinos than whites…when these frisks and searches are substantially less likely to uncover weapons, drugs, or other types of contraband” (Borowsky, Ayres). Officers are spending more time on race than focusing on real criminals who are ousting the reasons why this country is remarkable. Other cases like these have been confirmed as well. “Relative to stopped whites, stopped blacks is 127% more likely and

According to Pollock (2017) there is a perceived belief among minority groups in the United States that states law enforcement is fundamentally racist. In the minority neighborhoods, the police are looked upon in distrust. Racial profiling is when officers make traffic stops or consensual encounters with persons based off their race. Racial profiling began to assist border patrol and custom agents profile drug smugglers. Evidence has indicated that racial profiling does not occur because officers are racist. Sheriff Joe Arpio from Maricopa County Arizona, has been fighting with the Department of Justice over his practices regarding the treatment od Hispanics in his jurisdiction. Larry Sherman talked about loyalty to coworkers, that mostly

According to this perspective, disproportionate searches of racial minorities are justified if hit rates are equal across races or if some other measure of “efficient policing” is achieved. Although proponents of these two approaches disagree with one another as to whether racial disparities in search rates are morally or legally acceptable, their analyses suffer from similar shortcomings. In particular, both the civil libertarian and the economics approaches assume intentional or purposeful discrimination by police offers. Although data from around the country suggest that racial minorities are often searched at a disproportionately higher rate than Whites, there is little empirical evidence that those disparities are the result of malice or purposeful profiling. We instead begin with the assumption—based on considerable empirical evidence—that the factors influencing police officers’ decisions are complex (Black 1980; Goldstein 1977; Reiss 1984; Wilson 1973). In the present research context, therefore, it is implausible that race is the sole factor that causes police officers to search motorists. To be sure, the recognition of the “multivariate” nature of police officers’ decisions to search has yet to be met by concurrent multivariate empirical models of such behavior. Indeed, incidents of searches are complex events that cannot be understood through simple univariate frequency statistics and/or bivariate relationships. The Supreme Court itself often adopts a