This is an intelligent discussion of a controversial issue. Some grammatical errors (highlighted).
Racial Profiling
603-BXE-04
Racial profiling is not a new phenomenon. Study after study indicates that it increased to
a greater extent in the United States and Canada since “9/11”. It is a big concern for society at
large because it is still a matter under investigation to know to what extent it is just and unjust to
verify one regarding one’s race and ethnicity. On the other hand, police agents find it hard to
know who committed what crime and how to approach them. Even though we live in a large
diverse, multicultural and pluralistic society, racial profiling exists in a vast majority within our
society. The aim of this paper is to turn people’s attention to what extent racial profiling matters
in our society. Is racial profiling meant just to verify people who look suspicious in the eyes of
officers for better security of a country?
The following research, summarized by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police indicated
that racial profiling exists in United States in vast majority of places. “This report reviews
empirical studies conducted in the United States to evaluate police-citizen contacts during traffic
stops. The thrust of these studies has been to determine if racial profiling (in the popular sense)
exists within an agency or jurisdiction, by determining if minorities are disproportionately
represented in traffic stops, searches and/or citations based on their population in the study
jurisdiction. Many of these studies concluded that racial disparities exist in the aggregate rates of
such stops” (Royal Canadian Mounted Police 2007). This study indicates that in United States
minority drivers are disproportionately stopped by police (minorities include African American,
Mexicans, and Arabs.) Another similar study by Riley and Ridgeway concluded that drivers in
Massachusetts get a disproportionate number of traffic tickets. “The North-eastern study said
2
minority drivers in Massachusetts are given a disproportionate number of traffic tickets and are
searched more often than whites. In contrast, the study found that whites stopped by police get
off with only warnings more often than do minorities” (Riley and Greg Ridgeway 2004).
Another, research by Kevin indicated that racial profiling exists but it does not work. “Blacks,
Latinos and American Indians are more likely than whites to be stopped by police and searched
but much less likely to be found with anything illegal, a study of alleged racial profiling by
Minnesota law enforcers showed Wednesday” (Kevin 2003). There is another case describes a
moral dilemma in Mackinnon book of Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues, in chapter
twelve Equality and discrimination.
“The U.S. Border Patrol has been accused of using racial profiling in its decisions about
whom to select for questioning in border regions. People who “look Mexican” have been stopped
and questioned under suspicion of being illegal immigrants. Border Patrol agents say that this is
justified because a high percentage of Latinos in border areas are in the United States illegally.
Latinos who are U.S. citizens say that they are repeatedly stopped just because of their race and
appearance, and they resent this. Do you believe that using race in such decisions is justifiable
law-enforcement tactic or is it unjust discrimination? How do we weigh the costs of such
profiling to social harmony and to those individuals wrongly accused?”(Kevin 268). The case
also shows a similar problem and the Border Patrol agents say “this is justified”. Morally
discussing this case there is a theory in the book Ethics: theory and contemporary issues, author
says that “Natural law is the moral law written into nature itself. Natural law theory holds
objective moral good and bad, right and wrong, derived from human nature and its inherent
orientation to its well functioning and fulfilment, and that this is knowable by natural human
reason. The basic principle of the idea of natural rights is that they are self-evident and
3
inalienable”(76). The clearer formulation of such an idea is of course the American Declaration
of Independence 1776 where Thomas Jefferson wrote: “We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal and those they are endowed by their creator with certain
inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (78). This is the
basis for determining what should be considered “natural right.” Again, the same statement of
the U.S. Border Patrol Agents from the case when they say, “It is justified because a high
percentage of Latinos in border areas are in the United States illegally (268)” their statement
goes against the “natural right” according to what Jefferson stated. In addition, the statement
contradicts with the principle of equality. In the same book of Ethics: theory and contemporary
issues, the author describes the definition of the principle of equality, “It is unjust to treat people
differently in ways that deny to some of them significant social benefits unless we can show that
there is a difference between them that is relevant to the differential treatment” (196).
All the previous researches conducted very similar studies, and all the studies indicated
that in most places in United States minority drivers are disproportionately stopped by police
(minorities include African American, Mexicans, and Arabs.) In addition, one of the studies by
Kevin indicated that racial profiling exists but it does not work. In other words, racial profiling
does not deter crime. Police officers suspect these minorities and they stop them without a
rational reason. This creates discrimination against minorities and prejudice against them. There
are two ways to weigh this problem. One way to deal with it is to educate and train those officers
in such a way that people do not feel offended when they approach them. They should make
programs and send officers for training to learn how to treat and approach different people in the
domain of their work. Or, if they do not want to train the officers, police officers should treat
everyone equally no disregarding what their race, religion, and skin color is. They should impose
4
a new law saying that for the better safety of our nation and country, we check every individual
in a specific domain where they need to be verified. For example, at the Patrol Border, Agents
should stop and verify every one, whether they are suspected of crimes or not. Or, they should
not stop anyone to be fair to all. Thus, racial profiling creates discrimination against minorities,
and conflicts with the principle of equality; law should stop racial profiling. Since we live in a
large diverse, multicultural and pluralistic society, we should give up racial profiling in order to
not discriminate against minorities, and we should provide equal opportunities to everyone.
5
Bibliography:
MacKinnon, Barbara. Ethic: Theory and Contemporary Issues. 5th ed. Montreal,
Holly J. Allen, 2005.
“Racial Profiling in the United States.” Royal Canadian Mounted Police. 13 Feb. 2007
<http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ccaps/racial_profiling_goff_e.htm>
Jack, Riley & Greg, R. “Measuring Racial Profile by Police.” RAND Corporation. June. 2004
<http://www.rand.org/commentary/070604LEF.html>
Kevin. “Racial Profiling Exist and Does not Work.” Lean Left. 16 Sep. 2003
<http://www.leanleft.com/archives/2003/09/25/1657/>
6