The Racial Profiling of Minorities in America
Ethnic Studies 123 Professor Hebert Johnson
John Jay College of Crimnal Justice
By: Andy Victor
Our country was founded on this idea of freedom and how America was this land of opportunity. Time and history tells us it was easier said than done because racism restricted certain groups from achieving that “opportunity”. This social issue still haunts today but manifest not whips and chains but through racial profiling. Racial profiling is unjust, and a poison to the ideas of Democracy because it generalizes a specific group as being criminal and therefore makes the rest society inherit the same perception. In our society today, we have both
…show more content…
Hispanics were 1.48 times more likely to be stopped. After the traffic stop, non-Whites were more likely to be arrested, yet police in West Virginia obtained a significantly higher contraband hit rate for White drivers than minorities.” In Illinois statistics of the 2003 traffic stops uncovered similar patterns of racial profiling by law enforcement authorities. According to civilrights.org “The number of consent searches after traffic stops of African-American and Hispanic motorists were more than double that of Whites. The consent searches found White motorists were twice as likely to have contraband.” Another study exposed the Texas police department for practicing racial profiling. Civilrights.org writes “A 2005 study analyzing data gathered statewide in Texas reveals disproportionate traffic stops and searches of African Americans and Hispanics, even though law enforcement authorities were more likely to find contraband on Whites.” So not only can we argue that this is socially unjust but also unconstitutional. In many cases the racial profiling victims have not even committed a crime but yet they are constantly being treated as suspects.
Race should never be the basis of why a person is stopped, interrogated, and searched but unfortunately it is. According to the American Civil Liberties Union “On April 23, 2010, Arizona governor Jan
However, the events of the last few weeks paint a different story. In our society, it is common practice to profile, stop and frisk drivers and randomly (Epp & Maynard-Moody, 2013). For the good of the country, there is a greater opportunity to find guns, stolen merchandise, drugs, etc. when these stops occur. This appears to be great because everyone wants to themselves and their loved ones to be safe. Consequently, in the wage against drugs, racial minorities are stopped all over the country more than whites. For investigatory stops, people are normally stopped because of how they drive and if they are black. A “black man, who is age twenty-five or younger, has a 28 percent chance of being stopped for an investigatory reason over the course of a year; a similar young white man has a 12.5 percent chance, and a similar young white woman has only a 7 percent chance” (Epp and Maynard-Moody, 2013). The focus is on younger African-American males; because they are three to five times more subject to investigatory
The issue of racial profiling in America is one of great importance to the future of American society. This issue is not new to our society; racism and stereotyping are issues that date back to many years ago. Racial profiling in America is on that needs to be addressed by the government and society if we ever want America to truly be, The Land of The Free.
Even the United States struggles with issues of racial discrimination despite being a society highly based on immigrants and multicultural diversity. On one hand, people frown on treatment based on race, whether that is on an individual or group level. On the other, people are tired and annoyed by the seemingly constant call of discrimination. All of these feelings culminate into the debate pertaining to the use of racial profiling. Likewise, there are some individuals that hold a certain level of acceptance in regard to racial profiling. However, what is lost in the process because of that acceptance? There are many components that need to be thought about in reference to the use of racial profiling. In addition, it can be viewed
According to the 11 Facts about Racial Discrimination, “The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics concluded that an African American male born in 2001 has a 32% chance of going to jail in his lifetime, while a Latino male has a 17% chance, and a white male only has a 6% chance” (11 Facts about Racial Discrimination 1). Racial profiling, or discriminating against a whole group of people based on their race, is an unjust act and a big problem in our society today. Arresting people because of how they look like, or what they believe in is absurd. According to ACLU, “Racial Profiling refers to the discriminatory practice by law enforcement officials of targeting individuals for suspicion of crime based on the individual 's race, ethnicity, religion or national origin” (ACLU 1). Although law enforcement assumes they are doing their job, they need to remain objective and fair in all situations, because they are violating rights, lacking protection and risking lives.
Since the birth of our nation, racial profiling has been an issue longstanding and troubling among minority groups and still continues to exhibit severe consequences in communities.
Racial profiling is a very prevalent issue within the criminal justice system that is quite controversial, but there is a significant number of evidence that shows that racial profiling has been present since the 1600’s and continues to be a significant issue. Racial profiling is evident in the criminal justice system in various ways such as in interrogations, jury selection, misleading statistics, stops, and immigration laws. Racial profiling within interrogations and jury selection can be seen with the Brandley v. Keeshan case. Racial profiling within statistics can be seen in instances where the numbers focus on arrests and incarcerations that do not necessarily mean a crime was committed. Stops are seen as evidence showing racial profiling with a personal experience, and lastly, immigration laws are seen as showing racial profiling by the encounter of a Mexican American women had with an officer in Arizona.
These searches are meant to illustrate the increased police efficiency with the discovery of illegal contrabands, however, recent research has shown repeatedly that increasing the number of stops and searches among minorities doesn’t lead to more drug seizures than are found in routine traffic stops and searches among white drivers. Minorities are also subject to an increased number of arrests for minor crimes. In Minneapolis, African-Americans are 11 times more likely to be thrown into jail (but not necessarily convicted) for drinking in public, 19 times more likely for trespassing, 27 times more likely for lurking, and 42 times more likely for not having a valid license, than that of while citizens.
A report in 2005 by the Missouri attorney general is evidence to the unsuccessfulness of racial profiling. White drivers, who were pulled over and searched on the basis of suspicious behavior, were found to have illegal materials 24% of the time. Black drivers that were searched in a way that reflected an order of racial profiling were discovered to have drugs or other illegal substances 19% of the time. From The Leadership Conference, on the problem of racial profiling, states, “A study in Arizona shows that during 2006-2007, the state highway patrol was significantly more likely to stop African Americans and Hispanics than Whites on all the highways studied, while Native Americans and persons of Middle Eastern descent were more likely to be stopped on nearly all the highways studied. The highway patrol was 3.5 times more likely to search a stopped Native American than a White,
This research also showed that white drivers were both ticketed and searched at lower rates than black and Hispanic drivers. An NBC report based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics states that Blacks 9.5 percent and Hispanics 8.8 percent were more likely to be searched than whites 3.6 percent. There were slight but statistically insignificant declines compared with the 2002 report in the percentages of blacks and Hispanics searched. Blacks 4.5 percent were more than twice as likely as whites 2.1 percent to be arrested. Hispanic drivers were arrested 3.1 percent of the time. Among all police-public contacts, the force was used 1.6 percent of the time. But blacks 4.4 percent and Hispanics 2.3 percent were more likely than whites 1.2 percent to be subjected to force or the threat of force by police officers.
Racial profiling is simply, “the unlawful police practice of using race, color, or ethnic background, as the reason for conducting a traffic stop on an individual.” (Michigan Civil Rights Commission) This definition can be extended to any kind of discrimination mainly based on myths and stereotypes towards a certain race or ethnicity. However, the term racial profiling is commonly used when a police officer or any other law enforcer stops, questions, searches or arrests an individual purely on the basis of their race. African Americans or simply blacks have been the major racial group that has suffered much of racial profiling. Much of this is based on the stereotypes against the blacks are perceived as more likely to engage in criminal activities. For instance, in a 2013 Racial Profiling Data from Ferguson Police Department, out of 5384 police stops, 4632 were against blacks. (Ferguson Police Dept. 1) Despite the low population of blacks in U.S. compared to other races, the former continues being subjected to more racial profiling. Racial profiling against African Americans continues to expose the blacks to humiliation and racial injustices, as this paper will expose, thereby calling for the responsible authorities to address and find solutions for the problem.
“In 2005, a study analyzing data accumulated statewide in Texas reveals disproportionate traffic ceases and searches of African Americans and Hispanics, even though law enforcement authorities were more liable to find contraband on Whites.” (The Reality of Racial Profiling) The utilization of personal characteristics or comportment patterns to make generalizations about a person is called racial profiling. Throughout time, the utilization of race by law enforcement agencies in their policing activities has received considerable attention across the nation. The 4th amendment right that one has as an American, which is protecting against unreasonable search and seizure, is becoming contravened; one reason for the way one looks. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that racial profiling violates the constitutional requirement that all persons be accorded equal protection of the law, but it is still occurring in our society. Racial Profiling has caused the violation of our rights whether it maybe from a terry stop that was originated for the case Terry vs. Ohio, stop and frisk, racial vehicle stops, and the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act also known as Arizona SB 1070.
One major problem with the Justice System is that law enforcement use racial profiling affecting many people of color on a daily basis. Racial profiling is when law enforcement believe that certain groups are more likely to commit a crime rather than other groups. This is a major problem because in many cases there are very tragic incidents and as NAACP stated, “ Mr. Garner’s tragic death shows that for communities of color, including women and LGBT people of color, immigrants and low income communities, racial profiling has been and continues to be a constant reality of life, often with tragic and deadly consequences,” (45) Explains how racial profiling has become an everyday basis to minorities affecting them in many ways and unfortunately ends with death occasionally. Racial profiling is a huge dilemma
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
In New York City’s police department report in December 1999, the stop and frisk practices showed to be greatly based on race. In NYC, blacks make up 25.6% of the city’s population, Hispanics 23.7% and whites are 43.4% of NYC population. However, according to the report, 50.6% of all persons stopped were black, 33% were Hispanic, and only 12.9% were white. As you can see, more than half of the individuals who were stopped were black, 62.7% to be exact (ACLU, 2013). In Orange County, California Latinos, Asians and African Americans were more than 90% of the 20,221 men and women in the Gang Reporting Evaluation and Tracking System (ACLU, 2013). Clearly this database record shows racial profiling occurred when the total population in the database made up less than half of Orange County’s population. This is when the California Advisory Committee of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and the ACLU stepped in. One other instance of racial profiling I’d like to discuss occurred in Maricopa County, Arizona. A court ruled in May 2013 that “sheriff Joe Arpaio’s routine handling of people of Latino descent amounted to racial and ethnic profiling”; according to CNN, the sheriff’s office had a history of targeting vehicles with those having darker skin, examining them more strictly and taking them into custody more often than others (CNN, 2014). Judge Murray Snow ordered a monitor to oversee retraining in this
Racial profiling has become a severe obstacle in the U.S. today though most Americans know very little of this vital issue. Every day, people are being pulled over, harassed, and even killed for being of a certain race. There are new laws that politicians are trying to pass that promote racial discrimination. Racial profiling is immoral and does not increase public safety.