Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
View Poll Results: Should race be a factor in suspect profiling to fight terrorism?
Should race be a factor in suspect profiling to fight terrorism?
Prior to the September 11 terrorist attacks, racial profiling was known as a mostly state and local law enforcement practice that unfairly targeted blacks, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos for police scrutiny solely on the basis of race or ethnicity.
The 7/7/05 London bombings recently has broken a preconceived thought that the terrorists were from other countries. The suicide bombers were not smuggled into the country from the Islamic world...they were not trained in Iraq.
Three of the four had been born in Britain
One on the Caribbean island of Jamaica.
Two had infant children.
None of the bombers fit the typical terrorist profile that existed prior to 7/7/05. However, arguably now they do: they were all European Muslim which represents about 5 percent of Europe's population.
Its been established by the courts that race should not be the only factor in suspect profiling (i.e. the four hispanic kids, NJ police pulling over only minorities at the turnpike, etc.).
However, some have pointed out that there should be a distinction regarding the war time effort fighting terrorism.
Question of the day:
Should race be a factor in suspect profiling to fight terrorism?
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
It should be A factor - not the only one. My problem with racial profiling in cases like this is the minute you make it a major/main criteria, a terrorist who does not fit the profile escapes detection.
More important would be religious profiling (so far as it's possible). But I agree w/ Jon, it should be a factor but not necessarily the primary one--because anti-American terrorists come in all races, and it's simply not possible to profile Filipino and Perisan and Arab and African and etc...
More important would be religious profiling (so far as it's possible). But I agree w/ Jon, it should be a factor but not necessarily the primary one--because anti-American terrorists come in all races, and it's simply not possible to profile Filipino and Perisan and Arab and African and etc...
I think it should be used somewhat, but it doesn't work to use it only at baggage screening and such. When investigating businesses, individuals, etc. I wish we didn't have to go that route, as there will be a lot of folks who fit the "profile", but don't have anything to do with anything.
I don't think we need to do things like was done during WWII and take away people's homes without thorough investigation, but asking someone a few questions and checking out their garage to look for bomb-making stuff shouldn't be that big a deal. I'm all for privacy, but how else can we fight against this kind of stuff when we have to worry about "offending" someone who wants to blow us up?
Who here is willing to die to protect the privacy of someone that meets a certain profile?
__________________ This is my body. And I can do whatever I want to it. I can push it. Study it. Tweak it. Listen to it. Everybody wants to know what I'm on. What am I on? I'm on my bike busting my ass six hours a day. What are you on? - Lance Armstrong
I don't mind some of my civil rights getting tweaked if I'm getting on a bus or subway.
But if the police want to check my garage - they better have a warrant.
I agree warrants and such should still be necessary. I just think we sue over too many little things here rather than just not worrying about them and moving on.
__________________ This is my body. And I can do whatever I want to it. I can push it. Study it. Tweak it. Listen to it. Everybody wants to know what I'm on. What am I on? I'm on my bike busting my ass six hours a day. What are you on? - Lance Armstrong
I think it should be used somewhat, but it doesn't work to use it only at baggage screening and such. When investigating businesses, individuals, etc. I wish we didn't have to go that route, as there will be a lot of folks who fit the "profile", but don't have anything to do with anything.
I don't think we need to do things like was done during WWII and take away people's homes without thorough investigation, but asking someone a few questions and checking out their garage to look for bomb-making stuff shouldn't be that big a deal. I'm all for privacy, but how else can we fight against this kind of stuff when we have to worry about "offending" someone who wants to blow us up?
Who here is willing to die to protect the privacy of someone that meets a certain profile?
__________________
“So I became a newspaperman. I hated to do it but I couldn’t find honest employment.” —Mark Twain
Linear Mode
