Morrison 1
Natalie Morrison
Prof. Ellen Harcourt
WRT 1010
11/10/13
Racial Profiling
“In February, an unarmed 17-year-old African American named Trayvon Martin is shot
and killed by volunteer neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman, who had been
trailing the teenager as he walked through the gated community where he was
temporarily staying with his father. Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin and called 911
to report his presence; then he confronted the teenager, leading to a physical
altercation, and ultimately to the shooting (Key Events).”
The Trayvon Martin court case may be the most recent example of racial profiling our nation
has seen. However, racial profiling happens all over the country on a daily bases. Racial profiling
is when a person purposely singles out one race to be discriminated against. Although there
have been laws made against it, police are still taking part in profiling minority groups. Racial
Profiling has been around for centuries, from immigrants coming to America through Ellis Island
in the early twentieth century, to Blacks and Whites having segregated schools mid-century
(Carmen 666). Racial profiling can be displayed in more than one way; one is through the new
“Stop and Frisk” law, by making minorities feel uncomfortable in their own neighborhoods,
another way is when ethnic minorities are more often singled out because of their race. Racial
profiling happens despite laws passed against it, but more needs to be done on a personal and
national level to end it.
Morrison 2
“For decades, police departments in several American cities have employed a practice
known as "stop and frisk," in which officers are authorized to stop, question, pat down,
and search the bags of anyone they consider suspicious. Advocates of the practice
contend that it helps police target potential criminals, thereby preventing crimes before
they are committed, and credit the practice for a reduction in crime rates (Stop and
Frisk).”
Supporters of the “Stop and Frisk” policy say that it is the cause of the lowered homicide rates
and gang violence. However, statistics show that over eighty percent of the citizens that were
stopped were either Hispanic or African American males. Those who oppose this law believe
government officials are using this law to demonstrate racial profiling by these officials, such as
police, choosing whom they are going to stop and frisk before doing so. “Opponents of stop and
frisk also argue that the encounters, which can be combative or humiliating, distance the police
from local communities, creating resentment toward law enforcement agents, particularly
among minority populations (Stop and Frisk).” No American citizen should feel uncomfortable
or threatened in their own community.
“On August 12, 2013, Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled in the case Floyd v. City of
New York that the practice of stop and frisk, as employed by the NYPD, violated the U.S.
Constitution. Specifically, she ruled, the NYPD had violated the Fourth Amendment to
the Constitution, which protects people from "unreasonable search and seizures," and
the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees every person "equal protection of the
laws," by disproportionately targeting minorities without reasonable cause (Stop and
Frisk).”
Morrison 3
It is a violation of privacy for anyone to be searched if there is not probable cause. Fifty-three
percent of police say their reasons for stopping and questioning an individual is because of
furtive movements. Supporters say that it is not racial profiling because police are not racist; it
is just the fact that the majority of offenders are minorities. They say that racial profiling helps
keep the cities safe, but are those who are being stopped on the street and being violated
feeling safe? “No one should live in fear of being stopped whenever he leaves his home to go
about the activities of daily life,” wrote Judge Scheindlin (Judge Rejects). Nowhere does it say
in the constitution that one’s rights should be involuntarily violated because of their skin color.
In American the judicial system claims to be color-blind however there is proof that
police often will single out minority groups.
“You may now be thinking that if blacks choose to violate the law more often than
whites, they will naturally be overrepresented in the prisons. Yet that argument
depends on equality in the definition of crime, and this country lacks such equality. If
Congress defines crimes to affect one group of people more harshly than another, then
the results will be just as discriminatory as if the crime were defined equitably but
enforced in a discriminatory manner (Nolan).”
What Nolan means by this statement, is that some of the laws set in place by this country are
very bias, toward affecting one minority group. For example, the difference between powder
cocaine and crack. There is no difference in the physiological effect of the two, however, the
mandatory prison sentence is five years for five grams of crack equivalent to five-hundred and
seventy-five dollars, yet the same sentence for powder cocaine requires five-hundred grams
which equivalent to fifty-three thousand, five hundred dollars. If these have the same effects,
Morrison 4
why does the law require so much more powder cocaine for the same five year sentence? The
reason is simple, in 1993 eighty eight percent of those tried for crack distribution were African
American. In this case the government has chosen to punish one form of a drug, favored by
African Americans, harsher than another form of a drug with the same physiological effects
(Nolan). The definition of equality is the state of being equal in status, rights, and opportunities,
yet one in every fifteen African American men are incarcerated, versus one in every onehundred and six Caucasian men. Does this sound like an equal society? Now, racial profiling
does not just occur with African Americans and Latinos. Not too long ago in 2001, many people,
who were presumed to be Middle-Eastern, were profiled and had to deal with many racial
prejudices after the tragedy of September eleventh.
Racial profiling occurs on both a personal and national level. Although new laws have
been implemented to deter racial profiling, it continues to occur on a daily basis. Part of the
reason could be blamed on the fact that many minority, low income homes lack an adult male
role models, causing a stereotype that young minority males lack respect for the law, hence
causing them to commit crimes, which ultimately leads to their arrest. But the true fact is that
racial profiling still exists and is demonstrated in our news on a daily basis. For example, the
Travon Martin murder. There are many honest law officials who are truly trying to make society
a better place to live, however dealing with the numerous negative stigmatism that males from
ethnic minorities of society face, racism and profiling still exists. America is called the melting
pot for a reason, because the United States is made up of people of different races, cultures
and religions, and it is not right for one race to be treated differently than another.
Morrison 5
Works Sited
Carmen, Alejandro del. “Profiling, Racial: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives.”
Encyclopedia of Race and Crime. 2009. Sage Publications. 17 Aug. 2011. 9 Dec. 2013
Nolan, Tomas J. Proquest. Harvard Law and Public Policies. Racism in the Criminal Justice
System. Winter 1997. Web. 8 Dec. 2013
"Crime and Race." Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File
News Services, 4 Apr. 2003. Web. 13 Nov. 2013
“Judge Rejects New York’s Stop-and-Frisk Policy.” New York Times. 12 August 2013: Print
"Key Events in the History of Racial Profiling (sidebar)." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File
News Services, 3 Sept. 2012. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.
"Racial Profiling." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 3 Sept. 2012. Web. 20
Nov. 2013.
"Stop and Frisk." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 11 Nov. 2013. Web. 13
Nov. 2013.