News Racial Profiling
The Brits are preparing to do the unthinkable.
THE Government is discussing with airport operators plans to introduce a screening system that allows security staff to focus on those passengers who pose the greatest risk. The passenger-profiling technique involves selecting people who are behaving suspiciously, have an unusual travel pattern or, most controversially, have a certain ethnic or religious background.The system would be much more sophisticated than simply picking out young men of Asian appearance. But it would cause outrage in the Muslim community because its members would be far more likely to be selected for extra checks.
I’m not going to say anything one way or another about this. But I will pull a quote from this column written just after 9/11 by Slate’s Michael Kinsley:
When thugs menace someone because he looks Arabic, that’s racism. When airport security officials single out Arabic-looking men for a more intrusive inspection, that’s something else. What is the difference? The difference is that the airport security folks have a rational reason for what they do. An Arab-looking man heading toward a plane is statistically more likely to be a terrorist. That likelihood is infinitesimal, but the whole airport rigmarole is based on infinitesimal chances. If trying to catch terrorists this way makes sense at all, then Willie-Sutton logic says you should pay more attention to people who look like Arabs than to people who don’t. This is true even if you are free of all ethnic prejudices. It’s not racism.….
Until recently, the term “racial profiling” referred to the police practice of pulling over black male drivers disproportionately, on the statistically valid but morally offensive assumption that black male drivers are more likely to be involved in crime. Now the term has become virtually a synonym for racial discrimination. But if “racial profiling” means anything specific at all, it means rational discrimination: racial discrimination with a non-racist rationale. The question is: When is that OK?
The tempting answer is never: Racial discrimination is wrong no matter what the rationale. Period. But today we’re at war with a terror network that just killed 6,000 innocents and has anonymous agents in our country planning more slaughter. Are we really supposed to ignore the one identifiable fact we know about them? That may be asking too much.
"Until recently, the term “racial profiling” referred to the police practice of pulling over black male drivers disproportionately, on the statistically valid but morally offensive assumption that black male drivers are more likely to be involved in crime."
I'm not exactly sure what the difference is between the two. How is it less morally offensive to make the assumption that Arab, or "Arab looking" men are more likely to be involved in terrorism.
Not even mentioning the rather silly notion of profiling people, some of whom only 'look different' because of cultural artifacts. I highly doubt a terrorist is going to show up in a turban, with a long beard and flowing robs shouting death to America. That doesn’t even happen in the movies.