Re: Racial profiling
Laws against racial profiling are good in theory. Some had good intentions when the laws were passed. Most were afraid of what they would face if they did not pass the laws, and the rest were looking at a personal agenda. <br />I have to say that we law enforcement and military have to be very careful. In looking at middle eastern males we can't just assume because of their background they are evil terrorists. We need to be careful to find another cue and reach a decision based on the totality of the circumstances as they are presented to us. BUT if that poor fellow that is being checked out based on his race or religion has nothing to hide, he will be willing to be checked, cooperate and be done in short time. Of course we must consider the embarassment caused by being checked at the airport or on the streets. In their place I would have to say I would be upset. There are probably too many middle eastern males in this country that are NOT terrorists, that do not believe in what the terrorists are doing, and that are model citizens. The million dollar question is where is the middle ground here. How can we look out for our security while also protecting the civil rights of everyone we are protecting? Profiling laws are not the answer, but what is? <br />How about if someone declares that all males with dark hair and a receeding hairline are suspect? Would you like to be searched and surveilled every time you enter a bus terminal, an airport, or the local boat ramp? <br />The place where this law falls short is the same for every constitutional right we are given. It is all open to interpretation. You will have those (usually lawyers and politions) that will be using the laws to make a statement and get recognized. Then you will have those who are hurt by the decisions, then everyone else who is in charge that will be afraid of the repurcussions to stand up and speek out against these laws.<br />The racial profiling laws we face out here on the streets are so restraining that they really hurt everyone. Again they are good in concept, but not in practice. I have to keep a log sheet of everyone I stop on a traffic violation. I have to document their race, what I stopped them for, and if I requested a search of their vehicle. Problem #1 here is in my area most of my traffic stops are white drivers. I request searches if I suspect something, which is not too often. Usually I end up meeting tourists and families traveling to the lake. Now in a given month I will make around 100 traffic stops. I will request a search of around 25 to 30. All of these being white. Now I stop a hispanic male, see several signs that catch my attention like oh say a strong odor of dope from the vehicle. I request a search. He will within a week have his lawyers after me. They will pull my profiling sheets and see I search 25 out of 100 whites I stop. About 25%. Then they will say I searched 100% of all hispanics I stop. No mention will be made of why, the odor of dope the documented border crossing within 48 hours, the fact that this was a mexican national traveling across country to watch a basketball game with no luggage and no money, or the fact that this person hadn't bathed in days and the car is full of fast food wrappers indicating fast travel. All of that means nothing because I searched 100% of all hispanics I stop. That was not the intent of the law, but it is the way it is being used. And yes this happened to a friend of mine. He got 500 pounds of pot from the car then had to defend his actions because of the profiling laws.<br />We used to be allowed to profile everyone, even whites. Simply said, we had a sheet that had common indicators. Older car with newer equipment, newer car not matching the drivers obvious social or economic class, coming from or traveling to a known source state or city, traveling a distance with no luggage, car full of fast food containers, maps with routes marked out, sheets of phone numbers, etc. If we found more than 1 indicator we usually found a mule and got dope. Now our seizures are way down because of the constraints of these laws. <br />I have to say that some law enforcement and security personnell had to have these laws placed on them, and that is truely the sad part of all of this. Why in a free country should we even need these laws. The intent is good, and for some there had to be a limit, but for the other million security and law enforcement it has really hurt everyone.<br />Oh and good cartoon, I loved it.
