• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Racial profiling (1 Viewer)

Should racial profiling be allowed in searching

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 43.5%

  • No

    Votes: 8 34.8%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 4 17.4%

  • Undecided

    Votes: 1 4.3%
  • Total voters
    23
C

CanadianGuy

Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
217
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada eh!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Should racial profiling be alowed when searching people in subways, train stations and Airports?
 
I put maybe. Sorry for the indecisiveness, but let me explain. I believe that it may be in the interests of those doing the searches to racially profile in order to find terrorists (for example) and what not. However, this must be a strategic decision, because if we make it so that people who do not fit the terrorist description 100% safe from search, the terrorists will take advantage of that by using a disguise, or perhaps recruiting someone that can pull it off.

All that being said, I'm also concerned that the searches be constitutional. Fortunately, we have not gotten to the point of random, mandatory searches, as they are only for entry into a transportation system. Still, I think we're slowing down transportation, which is bad, and this increasing encrouchment on our civil liberties is disturbing. A terrorist will just take the path of least resistance anyway, so I don't know how much safer this is making us.
 
Yes but if they are only checking a few people it should be young men of middle eastern descent. If they waste time only a granny who most likely isn't going to have it (not saying she might not have had something slipped in her bag or something) then it could cost lives.
 
CanadianGuy said:
Yes but if they are only checking a few people it should be young men of middle eastern descent. If they waste time only a granny who most likely isn't going to have it (not saying she might not have had something slipped in her bag or something) then it could cost lives.
Click to expand...

Yeah, going after the grannies is just ridiculous. But I'm just saying that everyone once in a while you want to check someone who isn't of middle Eastern descent. Otherwise, that gives the terrorists a fool-proof strategy of recruiting someone who doesn't fit the profile.
 
Oh well thats ok. But still whats the point if it's just once and awhile you could choose to check the wrong person. Though if someone is acting suspicious and/or is wearing abnorma clothing then whoever they are it is necesary to check.
 
Connecticutter said:
I put maybe. Sorry for the indecisiveness, but let me explain. I believe that it may be in the interests of those doing the searches to racially profile in order to find terrorists (for example) and what not. However, this must be a strategic decision, because if we make it so that people who do not fit the terrorist description 100% safe from search, the terrorists will take advantage of that by using a disguise, or perhaps recruiting someone that can pull it off.

All that being said, I'm also concerned that the searches be constitutional. Fortunately, we have not gotten to the point of random, mandatory searches, as they are only for entry into a transportation system. Still, I think we're slowing down transportation, which is bad, and this increasing encrouchment on our civil liberties is disturbing. A terrorist will just take the path of least resistance anyway, so I don't know how much safer this is making us.
Click to expand...

I believe you have a good point. If we make the transit systems incredibly secure, they will find something else. Football games, malls, whatever, they will find it. I think the line "A terrorist will just take the path of least resistance" is really very accurate.

As to racial profiling, I'm also on the fence. Taken too far one way, say, searching every Muslim, it would be a waste of time, resources, and would go against my morals. However, ignoring statistics on the subject seems ridiculous as well.

If say, 25% of the people that cause an "incident" (I don't really know what I mean by this. Maybe it's just a guy standing up and screaming, and causing a scene, or maybe it's blowing up a bus. But it's somewhat irrelevant) were Caucasian, then maybe 25% of the searches we preformed should be on Caucasian people.

Although I'm still not happy with that. It could cause people to do searches to meet quotas, etc. I'm not sure...

I don't know. I still don't like it...Grr...

I'm still on the fence. I'm interested to see what others think...
 
you confused me there but I do agree with both of you on the path of least resistance. But if we make it so there is always resistance then attacks will be harder to do and then less and less frequent.
 
Put it this way. If I, teacher, of the massive brain, being a white male, were living in a country of blue skinned people, and white males were blowing up things, I'd pretty well expect to be searched. And if I weren't, I'd think them dumbas*ses.

You know a while back there was a black Florida state trooper who had a 97% bust rate pulling over young black males running drugs. They made him stop. Like that makes sense. Way to be PC lefties.

The Arab terrorists must be laughing at our stupidity. Probably donating to Democratic campaigns also. It's what I'd do if I were them.
 
Of course you profile the race of people who are committing the terrorist acts even if its not the politically correct thing to do............
 
I said no not because of some PC bull but because of people like John Walker Lindh. He is a white male, and if racial profiling is the only thing that cops, FBI, CIA, or whoever uses then Walker could walk around any major city with a dirty bomb strabed to his back, and it only takes one person to get by for the terrorists to claim victroy.
 
quietrage said:
I said no not because of some PC bull but because of people like John Walker Lindh. He is a white male, and if racial profiling is the only thing that cops, FBI, CIA, or whoever uses then Walker could walk around any major city with a dirty bomb strabed to his back, and it only takes one person to get by for the terrorists to claim victroy.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean?
 
CanadianGuy said:
I'm not sure what you mean?
Click to expand...
Well Walker was a white man and racial profiling is based on race so if we used racial profiling then Walker or any other white male could blow up anything and the cops would not have looked in his backpack.
John Walker is the American who fought with the Taliban. So if anyone who thinks like he did then the terrorists could use that person to carry out the attacks.
Basically I am saying that you can not see the madness inside just based on the color of someones skin, and also I have an Arab friend who could pass for white so I do not think that he would be checked
 
Oh ok. But that is one man and if the majority are of a certain race then we need to check that race more often. Also we could also just check younger men that would work but would be a large group.
 
Yes but it wouldn't make sense to check people who are not as likely to be a threat when we do not have the resources to do so.
 
quietrage said:
But one man can can do alot of damage and checking younger men is not racial profiling
Click to expand...


How about we check ALL men then? See... our way around that. That's not racial profiling. Stand in line and STRIP.... errrr let me see in your bag :3oops:
 
debate_junkie said:
How about we check ALL men then? See... our way around that. That's not racial profiling. Stand in line and STRIP.... errrr let me see in your bag :3oops:
Click to expand...

It would be nice if we could check everyone but there is not enough resources.
 
CanadianGuy said:
It would be nice if we could check everyone but there is not enough resources.
Click to expand...


*watches the 747 fly right over CG's head* Another failed attempt at humor. I think I need to go to the basement and learn from teach :doh
 
debate_junkie said:
How about we check ALL men then? See... our way around that. That's not racial profiling. Stand in line and STRIP.... errrr let me see in your bag :3oops:
Click to expand...
I am just syaing that once you limit the group that you check there will be people who slip through the system
 
debate_junkie said:
*watches the 747 fly right over CG's head* Another failed attempt at humor. I think I need to go to the basement and learn from teach :doh
Click to expand...

Ok I am sorta confused elaborate please. I also have said before if someone is suspicious they should be checked no matter what they could have done something else wrong.
 
quietrage said:
I am just syaing that once you limit the group that you check there will be people who slip through the system
Click to expand...

Maybe but does it make sense to check the miniority if there is not enough resources?
 
not really but i am trying to say that checking people based on anything for anything is going to fail because the minority will always fall through the cracks
 
I love our new mentality.

Just because you look one way we're going to consider you a suspect.


I voted NO.
Maybe we should start having Racial Profiling on White People! I mean, we do terrorist attacks as well!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom