And what is the difference between looking for "arabic looking" Islamic terrorists, and "young, white male" serial killers? Why is one just simply "criminal profiling" and the other "racial".
If every white male was a suspect just by virtue of being white, there would be no difference. However, I don't believe that every white male is suspected of being a serial killer or has their residence/belongings searched when there is a serial killer on the loose.
Other factors are involved in criminal profiling. Specifically things like marital status, level of education, what books they read, where they hang out. Can airport security workers know ANY of that when screening passengers? If not, then they are judging based solely on one's appearance. It's inaccurate and wrong to do.
Bear in mind, I'm not against criminal profiling when the things I mentioned above are considered. I am adamantly against it when all real factors are thrown to the wind and people are suspect by the color of their skin.
-t
n.b., I'm also not against scholarships based on race for the above reasons.
A few years back, I was under 25, male, and unmarried, thus my car insurance was twice what it is now, though I never had a wreck or a ticket between age 16 and 25. I fit the "profile" of a high-risk driver.
We tolerate profiling all over the place. We shouldn't have to. It's just another tool by the "powers that be" to remind us that we are OWNED by their system.
A few years back, I was under 25, male, and unmarried, thus my car insurance was twice what it is now, though I never had a wreck or a ticket between age 16 and 25. I fit the "profile" of a high-risk driver.
We tolerate profiling all over the place. We shouldn't have to. It's just another tool by the "powers that be" to remind us that we are OWNED by their system.
Cry me a river. That's not profiling in the sense we're talking about here. Everyone is at risk of getting into a car accident. Not everyone is "at risk" for hijacking a plane.
You were statistically more likely to get into a wreck than other groups. And your status was not immutable. You aged out of it. You proved you were a safe driver. And insurance companies knew this to be true because they have your records. Does airport security have access to one's records like this? Nope.
Racial profiling as a method of detecting terrorists simply is not a good idea for practical reasons. Do you want to be protected from terrorists? If yes, then put your political games on the back burner and deal with the fact that racial profiling is counter-productive.
But go ahead and promote needless racism through profiling. While you are at it, place some ads on al-qaeda websites reminding them that all they have to do is send one of the hundreds of millions of non-arab muslims to attack the us.
Quote:
The 10 countries with the largest Muslim populations, in descending order, are Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Turkey, Iran, Egypt, Nigeria, and China.[21] Of these, only Egypt is an Arab country, and despite the stereotypes, only 193 million of the world?s Muslims?15 to 18 percent of the total?are Arabs
Racial profiling as a method of detecting terrorists simply is not a good idea for practical reasons. Do you want to be protected from terrorists? If yes, then put your political games on the back burner and deal with the fact that racial profiling is counter-productive.
But go ahead and promote needless racism through profiling. While you are at it, place some ads on al-qaeda websites reminding them that all they have to do is send one of the hundreds of millions of non-arab muslims to attack the us.
I don't see any real clear evidence other than there are similarities of their stories. Exchange students come and go in this country all the time though. While it may be suspicious, that stuff happens all the time. You don't think countries spy on their allies all the time?
And the DOT has repeatedly denied the quota. Yet in interviews several Senators and high ranking Airline officials have all confirmed it. Plus FINES were levied in several cases.
If every white male was a suspect just by virtue of being white, there would be no difference. However, I don't believe that every white male is suspected of being a serial killer or has their residence/belongings searched when there is a serial killer on the loose.
Other factors are involved in criminal profiling. Specifically things like marital status, level of education, what books they read, where they hang out. Can airport security workers know ANY of that when screening passengers? If not, then they are judging based solely on one's appearance. It's inaccurate and wrong to do.
Bear in mind, I'm not against criminal profiling when the things I mentioned above are considered. I am adamantly against it when all real factors are thrown to the wind and people are suspect by the color of their skin.
-t
n.b., I'm also not against scholarships based on race for the above reasons.
So as long as race isn't the only factor involved it's ok? Or is it bad if race is any factor in the profile? Would that seperate Racial from Criminal profiling?
So as long as race isn't the only factor involved it's ok? Or is it bad if race is any factor in the profile? Would that seperate Racial from Criminal profiling?
I've been away from this thread for a few days. Let me clarify my position on this: there are certain things that one has no control over. Race, gender, age, etc. There are other things that one does have control over: reading material, social groups, political leanings, etc.
I'm against ANY profiling that acts solely on the first set of things. I may be against profiling that acts on a combination of the first and second sets of things (because of the fallibility of the indicators and the fallibility of those identifying them).
I, for one, don't trust the TSA's employees to make educated decisions about risk. Let me make this clear: I'm not against random screenings of passengers. Hell, they could screen every 2 people for all I care. As long as it's not based on some high school dropout's assessment of "risk."
It's easy enough to pick out a random number, say "x", every hour on the hour, and screen every "x" passengers. The random number seed could be random and go from there. I can clarify further, if you like.
-t
ps - I'm amazed that this thread has stayed civil for so long. I hope it can stay this way.
So as long as race isn't the only factor involved it's ok? Or is it bad if race is any factor in the profile? Would that seperate Racial from Criminal profiling?
Race should be considered nothing more than one of those factors that should not influence e.g. whether you are taken to a particular job. So something like sex, birth place, age, health history etc - it should NOT be filed, so that it can not be used in a discriminatory way.
I've been away from this thread for a few days. Let me clarify my position on this: there are certain things that one has no control over. Race, gender, age, etc. There are other things that one does have control over: reading material, social groups, political leanings, etc.
I'm against ANY profiling that acts solely on the first set of things. I may be against profiling that acts on a combination of the first and second sets of things (because of the fallibility of the indicators and the fallibility of those identifying them).
I, for one, don't trust the TSA's employees to make educated decisions about risk. Let me make this clear: I'm not against random screenings of passengers. Hell, they could screen every 2 people for all I care. As long as it's not based on some high school dropout's assessment of "risk."
It's easy enough to pick out a random number, say "x", every hour on the hour, and screen every "x" passengers. The random number seed could be random and go from there. I can clarify further, if you like.
-t
ps - I'm amazed that this thread has stayed civil for so long. I hope it can stay this way.
That clarifies things a bit. Thanks.
It's a question that walks a bit of a fine line, I know. I'm still trying to figure out exactly where I stand on it too (in case it looks like I'm wavering on my stance).
This makes sense though. But what if the random screenings pull up 2 or more people of the same "ethnic group"? Would that be ok as long as they were pulled randomly?
BTW... have to agree. I'm enjoying the civil conversations too.
This makes sense though. But what if the random screenings pull up 2 or more people of the same "ethnic group"? Would that be ok as long as they were pulled randomly?
BTW... have to agree. I'm enjoying the civil conversations too.
I'm not sure about the 2 person rule, but the chances of 2 people of the same ethnic minority being randomly selected from a group of 100+ people is slim. Very slim. The rule is probably in place to make sure that airport workers aren't using their (faulty) judgment to decide who is a threat and who isn't.
Let me just say this about racial profiling (I know anecdotes don't mean much, but....): About a month ago I was travelling with a group of colleagues. In the security line, they were directly ahead of me. There was a group of people behind me, as well. Who got "randomly" selected for a search? Me. I'm 20-something and middle eastern. Was it random? Hell no, it wasn't random because the people who decided I should be searched saw what I looked like. Did anyone else get searched the entire time I sat fuming waiting for my flight? Nope. (I was upset not because I was searched but because they started going through my things without my observation. Next time that happens I'm going to let them know I'm not about to bend over and take a violation of my privacy like that.... They can search, but I, in no way, forfeit my right to watch them...)
I'm not sure about the 2 person rule, but the chances of 2 people of the same ethnic minority being randomly selected from a group of 100+ people is slim. Very slim. The rule is probably in place to make sure that airport workers aren't using their (faulty) judgment to decide who is a threat and who isn't.
Let me just say this about racial profiling (I know anecdotes don't mean much, but....): About a month ago I was travelling with a group of colleagues. In the security line, they were directly ahead of me. There was a group of people behind me, as well. Who got "randomly" selected for a search? Me. I'm 20-something and middle eastern. Was it random? Hell no, it wasn't random because the people who decided I should be searched saw what I looked like. Did anyone else get searched the entire time I sat fuming waiting for my flight? Nope. (I was upset not because I was searched but because they started going through my things without my observation. Next time that happens I'm going to let them know I'm not about to bend over and take a violation of my privacy like that.... They can search, but I, in no way, forfeit my right to watch them...)
Although airport security would have fits on flights to Saudi Arabia... :P
Sorry that happened. Sounds pretty crappy. You should have spoken up about the search though. I certainly would have. If nobody else was selected from your flight the it couldn't have been that random now, could it?
Comments
Originally posted by FaydRautha
I mean in all honesty, when looking for Islamic terrorists you can generally rule out Nuns and Chasidic Jews.
Not true, as pointed out above, and in the following case
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...220704625.html
Originally posted by giant
Many serial killers I hear about here in chicago are black.
Have you watched Bowling for Columbine?
Originally posted by FaydRautha
And what is the difference between looking for "arabic looking" Islamic terrorists, and "young, white male" serial killers? Why is one just simply "criminal profiling" and the other "racial".
If every white male was a suspect just by virtue of being white, there would be no difference. However, I don't believe that every white male is suspected of being a serial killer or has their residence/belongings searched when there is a serial killer on the loose.
Other factors are involved in criminal profiling. Specifically things like marital status, level of education, what books they read, where they hang out. Can airport security workers know ANY of that when screening passengers? If not, then they are judging based solely on one's appearance. It's inaccurate and wrong to do.
Bear in mind, I'm not against criminal profiling when the things I mentioned above are considered. I am adamantly against it when all real factors are thrown to the wind and people are suspect by the color of their skin.
-t
n.b., I'm also not against scholarships based on race for the above reasons.
A few years back, I was under 25, male, and unmarried, thus my car insurance was twice what it is now, though I never had a wreck or a ticket between age 16 and 25. I fit the "profile" of a high-risk driver.
We tolerate profiling all over the place. We shouldn't have to. It's just another tool by the "powers that be" to remind us that we are OWNED by their system.
Originally posted by Jubelum
I am a victim of profiling.
A few years back, I was under 25, male, and unmarried, thus my car insurance was twice what it is now, though I never had a wreck or a ticket between age 16 and 25. I fit the "profile" of a high-risk driver.
We tolerate profiling all over the place. We shouldn't have to. It's just another tool by the "powers that be" to remind us that we are OWNED by their system.
Cry me a river. That's not profiling in the sense we're talking about here. Everyone is at risk of getting into a car accident. Not everyone is "at risk" for hijacking a plane.
You were statistically more likely to get into a wreck than other groups. And your status was not immutable. You aged out of it. You proved you were a safe driver. And insurance companies knew this to be true because they have your records. Does airport security have access to one's records like this? Nope.
Originally posted by Jubelum
We tolerate profiling all over the place.
Racial profiling as a method of detecting terrorists simply is not a good idea for practical reasons. Do you want to be protected from terrorists? If yes, then put your political games on the back burner and deal with the fact that racial profiling is counter-productive.
But go ahead and promote needless racism through profiling. While you are at it, place some ads on al-qaeda websites reminding them that all they have to do is send one of the hundreds of millions of non-arab muslims to attack the us.
The 10 countries with the largest Muslim populations, in descending order, are Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Turkey, Iran, Egypt, Nigeria, and China.[21] Of these, only Egypt is an Arab country, and despite the stereotypes, only 193 million of the world?s Muslims?15 to 18 percent of the total?are Arabs
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/sac/dc0603/ch2.htm
Originally posted by giant
Racial profiling as a method of detecting terrorists simply is not a good idea for practical reasons. Do you want to be protected from terrorists? If yes, then put your political games on the back burner and deal with the fact that racial profiling is counter-productive.
But go ahead and promote needless racism through profiling. While you are at it, place some ads on al-qaeda websites reminding them that all they have to do is send one of the hundreds of millions of non-arab muslims to attack the us.
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/sac/dc0603/ch2.htm
The next sentence: WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.
Originally posted by giant
Well, there was the group cheering the attacks, the group with the video of the sears tower and the multiple groups stopped in moving vans.
Pre-9/11: http://cryptome.org/dea-il-spy.htm
The Dept of Trans denies that such a quota ever existed.
http://www.mastalk.com/articlefull.asp?ID=17
It seems to me that we need more info first.
I don't see any real clear evidence other than there are similarities of their stories. Exchange students come and go in this country all the time though. While it may be suspicious, that stuff happens all the time. You don't think countries spy on their allies all the time?
And the DOT has repeatedly denied the quota. Yet in interviews several Senators and high ranking Airline officials have all confirmed it. Plus FINES were levied in several cases.
Originally posted by torifile
If every white male was a suspect just by virtue of being white, there would be no difference. However, I don't believe that every white male is suspected of being a serial killer or has their residence/belongings searched when there is a serial killer on the loose.
Other factors are involved in criminal profiling. Specifically things like marital status, level of education, what books they read, where they hang out. Can airport security workers know ANY of that when screening passengers? If not, then they are judging based solely on one's appearance. It's inaccurate and wrong to do.
Bear in mind, I'm not against criminal profiling when the things I mentioned above are considered. I am adamantly against it when all real factors are thrown to the wind and people are suspect by the color of their skin.
-t
n.b., I'm also not against scholarships based on race for the above reasons.
So as long as race isn't the only factor involved it's ok? Or is it bad if race is any factor in the profile? Would that seperate Racial from Criminal profiling?
Originally posted by FaydRautha
So as long as race isn't the only factor involved it's ok? Or is it bad if race is any factor in the profile? Would that seperate Racial from Criminal profiling?
I've been away from this thread for a few days. Let me clarify my position on this: there are certain things that one has no control over. Race, gender, age, etc. There are other things that one does have control over: reading material, social groups, political leanings, etc.
I'm against ANY profiling that acts solely on the first set of things. I may be against profiling that acts on a combination of the first and second sets of things (because of the fallibility of the indicators and the fallibility of those identifying them).
I, for one, don't trust the TSA's employees to make educated decisions about risk. Let me make this clear: I'm not against random screenings of passengers. Hell, they could screen every 2 people for all I care. As long as it's not based on some high school dropout's assessment of "risk."
It's easy enough to pick out a random number, say "x", every hour on the hour, and screen every "x" passengers. The random number seed could be random and go from there. I can clarify further, if you like.
-t
ps - I'm amazed that this thread has stayed civil for so long. I hope it can stay this way.
Originally posted by FaydRautha
So as long as race isn't the only factor involved it's ok? Or is it bad if race is any factor in the profile? Would that seperate Racial from Criminal profiling?
Race should be considered nothing more than one of those factors that should not influence e.g. whether you are taken to a particular job. So something like sex, birth place, age, health history etc - it should NOT be filed, so that it can not be used in a discriminatory way.
This is an excellent actor named Cliff Curtis. He's from New Zealand and is of Maori descent.
Do you honestly think a Airport worker would be able to look at Clif and ascertain what "race" he is?
Cliff has played everything. He's been a mexican(Training Day) an Arab( Collateral Damage) and seemingly everything else but a polynesian.
Nay I don't think Racial profiling will work at all. It's far to prone to stereotypes.
Originally posted by torifile
I've been away from this thread for a few days. Let me clarify my position on this: there are certain things that one has no control over. Race, gender, age, etc. There are other things that one does have control over: reading material, social groups, political leanings, etc.
I'm against ANY profiling that acts solely on the first set of things. I may be against profiling that acts on a combination of the first and second sets of things (because of the fallibility of the indicators and the fallibility of those identifying them).
I, for one, don't trust the TSA's employees to make educated decisions about risk. Let me make this clear: I'm not against random screenings of passengers. Hell, they could screen every 2 people for all I care. As long as it's not based on some high school dropout's assessment of "risk."
It's easy enough to pick out a random number, say "x", every hour on the hour, and screen every "x" passengers. The random number seed could be random and go from there. I can clarify further, if you like.
-t
ps - I'm amazed that this thread has stayed civil for so long. I hope it can stay this way.
That clarifies things a bit. Thanks.
It's a question that walks a bit of a fine line, I know. I'm still trying to figure out exactly where I stand on it too (in case it looks like I'm wavering on my stance).
This makes sense though. But what if the random screenings pull up 2 or more people of the same "ethnic group"? Would that be ok as long as they were pulled randomly?
BTW... have to agree. I'm enjoying the civil conversations too.
Originally posted by FaydRautha
This makes sense though. But what if the random screenings pull up 2 or more people of the same "ethnic group"? Would that be ok as long as they were pulled randomly?
BTW... have to agree. I'm enjoying the civil conversations too.
I'm not sure about the 2 person rule, but the chances of 2 people of the same ethnic minority being randomly selected from a group of 100+ people is slim. Very slim. The rule is probably in place to make sure that airport workers aren't using their (faulty) judgment to decide who is a threat and who isn't.
Let me just say this about racial profiling (I know anecdotes don't mean much, but....): About a month ago I was travelling with a group of colleagues. In the security line, they were directly ahead of me. There was a group of people behind me, as well. Who got "randomly" selected for a search? Me. I'm 20-something and middle eastern. Was it random? Hell no, it wasn't random because the people who decided I should be searched saw what I looked like. Did anyone else get searched the entire time I sat fuming waiting for my flight? Nope. (I was upset not because I was searched but because they started going through my things without my observation. Next time that happens I'm going to let them know I'm not about to bend over and take a violation of my privacy like that.... They can search, but I, in no way, forfeit my right to watch them...)
Originally posted by torifile
I'm not sure about the 2 person rule, but the chances of 2 people of the same ethnic minority being randomly selected from a group of 100+ people is slim. Very slim. The rule is probably in place to make sure that airport workers aren't using their (faulty) judgment to decide who is a threat and who isn't.
Let me just say this about racial profiling (I know anecdotes don't mean much, but....): About a month ago I was travelling with a group of colleagues. In the security line, they were directly ahead of me. There was a group of people behind me, as well. Who got "randomly" selected for a search? Me. I'm 20-something and middle eastern. Was it random? Hell no, it wasn't random because the people who decided I should be searched saw what I looked like. Did anyone else get searched the entire time I sat fuming waiting for my flight? Nope. (I was upset not because I was searched but because they started going through my things without my observation. Next time that happens I'm going to let them know I'm not about to bend over and take a violation of my privacy like that.... They can search, but I, in no way, forfeit my right to watch them...)
Although airport security would have fits on flights to Saudi Arabia... :P
Sorry that happened. Sounds pretty crappy. You should have spoken up about the search though. I certainly would have. If nobody else was selected from your flight the it couldn't have been that random now, could it?