read and respond to racial profiling

Anonymous
timer Asked: Mar 26th, 2017
account_balance_wallet $10

Question Description

give feedback to two posts-- 250 words each..

THE QUESTION THAT IS ORIGINALLY BEING ASKED/ANSWERED IN THE ATTACHMENT IS--- Is racial profiling a common practice? Why or why not? Explain the arguments for and against it? What if any impact does the Supreme Court's decision in Whren v. United States have on racial profiling? Support your position.

DO NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION---(you did this)

see attachment

Unformatted Attachment Preview

what you do is specifically respond to them about their post.. if you agree or disagree state why, cite properly, add more details.. Just the goal is to provide feedback to stimulate conversation or debate on said topic PROVIDE 250 WORD FEEDBACKS TO EACH POST. BLUEBOOK CITATIONS FORMATTING PRICE RESPONSE ---1111111111 I feel in my own experience in law enforcement that racial profiling is still prominent in our police forces. On any given day working in the drug lab at the D.C. courthouse I see what seems to be a disproportionate amount of racial bias as to the people that are on supervision and this applies also to when I worked in probation. Demographically speaking, the District of Columbia has a large African American population, but to go several days at a time without encountering a white defendant on the pretrial side or the probation side leads me to be suspicious of our policing tactics in the District as there is a still a sizeable white population in D.C. This is of course an analysis of an inner-city and in comparison, to more rural areas this may not be the case. The arguments for racial profiling are that it can provide security by helping law enforcement find a possible suspect based on racial or ethnic cues. It is also seen as reasonable by some citing that if for instance since it is a hot topic right now that if we are on the lookout for Islamic terrorists then we should be targeting people from specific countries and how they look or speak (which I fundamentally disagree with). In fact, I have first-hand knowledge, via a colleague whose job it was, that our Department of Homeland Security specifically targets people of certain ethnic backgrounds in collaboration with the Transportation Security Administration at airports. My colleague would walk around in plain clothes and tag typically persons of middle eastern descent to be detained and questioned without any probable cause other than their ethnicity. Profiling can also save money when law enforcement is looking for a specific criminal. Knowing the criminal’s description can help them narrow in on their search and not waste time looking at persons that do not fit the description. [1] Clearly the most prominent issue with this is that it is racist. Generalizations about a whole community can lead to a disproportionate police response in a neighborhood based on the color of your skin. Race is a social construct; not knowable by sight. “Racial profiles are both overinclusive in the sense that many, indeed most, of the people who fit into the category are entirely innocent, and under-inclusive in that many other criminals or terrorists who do not fit the profile will escape police attention. Racial profiling also faces the problems of predictability and evasion; the more predictable police profiles become, the easier it is for perpetrators to adapt to circumvent the profile. [2] I believe the implications of Whren v. U.S. are that it allows for these pretext stops and even can encourage racial profiling. [3] With so many minor traffic violations that can occur, officers can find seemingly the smallest thing to pull you over when targeting someone of a specific race. [1] Racial Profiling Pros and Cons List, Occupy Theory (2015), https://occupytheory.org/racial-profiling-pros-and-cons-list/ [2] Rebekah Delsol, Racial profiling, 101 Criminal Justice Matters 34–35, 34-35 (2015). [3] Search & Seizure: Whren v. U.S., Flex Your Rights, https://www.flexyourrights.org/whren_v_us/ ********************************************************************* L PERRY RESPONSE ---222222222 Is racial profiling a common practice? Why or why not? Explain the arguments for and against it? What if any impact does the Supreme Court's decision in Whren v. United States have on racial profiling? Support your position. Racial profiling is described as the practice of stopping people based on race rather than legitimate criteria. [1] If people refer to the media and believe that the things they report are not only completely true, but also are the only events that occur throughout the United States then they will be unhesitant to say that racial profiling is the largest issue that we have in America. The answer is not that simple and actually requires more in depth research in order to determine if racial profiling is really a common practice. First, I took a look at the federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Uniform Crime Report statics from 2013. This data was pulled from 11,951 agencies with an estimated population of 245,741,701. They published charts that break down each crime and the percentage of people arrested for that particular crime based on race. The overall consensus is as followed: In 2013, 68.9 percent of all individuals arrested were white, 28.3 percent were African American, and 2.9 percent were of other races, of all persons under the age of eighteen in 63.0 percent were white, 34.4 percent were African American, and 2.7 percent were of other races, White individuals were arrested more often for violent crimes than individuals of any other race and accounted for 58.4 percent of those arrests, of adults arrested for murder, 52.1 percent were African American, and 45.5 percent were white, and of juveniles arrested for drug abuse violations, 73.0 percent were white. [2] Due to the statistics published by the FBI, I do not think that racial profiling is a common practice. I do think that racial profiling occurs but this does not mean that it is a common practice. Common is defined as,occurring, found, or done often; prevalent. I think that since the media has the ability to pick and choose what they report and the lack of research done on some citizen’s behalf, it has created a misconception that racial profiling is a common practice. Whren v. United States was a unanimous United States Supreme Court decision that declared that any traffic offense committed by a driver was a legitimate legal basis for a stop. [3] Stopping people that violate traffic offenses is a large part of police officers’ jobs and while I do not think it has a large impact on criminal profiling it does have a small potential to. In Whren v. United States, the petitioners sped off from a stop sign at an alarming rate and did not use their blinker which both violate traffic laws in the District of Columbia. [4] The police officers stopped them because they broke the law, it was coincidence that they caught them with crack cocaine; that had nothing to do with racial profiling and was not unconstitutional. It is important to note that arrest reports are not private, they go the police officer’s supervisor, lawyers, courts, you can even obtain it yourself and in some states, obtain it on behalf of your family members. This does not provide police officers the chance to run rampant like many citizens think they can because the arrest will be publicized to many individuals and officials. An individual police officer could pull over one race and choose not to pull over another for a traffic incident and that is definitely racial profiling. However, because Whrens V. United States held that any traffic offense committed by a driver was a legitimate legal basis for a stop does not mean there will be racial profiling throughout the United States because of it. What it will do, however, is keep our streets and pedestrians safer from any person that is breaking traffic laws. [1] John Worrall, Criminal Procedure: from First Contact to Appeal, (5th ed. 2015). [2] FBI: UCR, Crime in the United State 2013, (2013) https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.2013/tables/table-43 [3] Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996). [4] Id. ...

This question has not been answered.

Create a free account to get help with this and any other question!

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors