In the largest survey ever conducted in the United States regarding contacts with the police, the Bureau of Justice statistics found that African Americans and Hispanics were more likely to experience a threat of force, or the actual use of force, by the police as a result of contact with the police. (Langan, Greenfield, Smith, Durose, and Levin, 2001, p. 7) Also, African American drivers stopped by the police were more likely than white drivers to be ticketed arrested or have their vehicle searched (Langan et al., 2001, p.22).

The vicious cycle of the police accusing minorities.

From the perspective of some members of the police force the reason that they are more likely to suspect certain minorities (such as African Americans or Hispanics) of committing crimes or participating in unlawful behaviour is because they “appear” to be the groups that act in the most suspicious manners and tend to disrespect police and the work that they do. But the truth is , wouldn’t it make sense that if the authorities are constantly targeting the same groups over and over again, and giving others assumed privilege and trust that based on who gets caught it would be the members of minorities considering they are the ones being questioned, searched and stopped on the most frequent basis?

This creates a disturbing cycle among crime and crime prevention within society. The relationship between the police and members of certain minorities becomes one against another instead of the police protecting a community as a whole from harmful behaviour and maintaining order. It is an obvious assumption that racial groups who are repeatedly victims of police brutality, racial profiling and unfair treatment in general are going to resent authority that treats them this way, and in some cases figure that if “they can’t beat them, they might as well join them.” This is called a “self-fulfilling prophecy,” people who are treated according to assumptions instead of reality begin to act in ways that fulfill a specific prophecy others have set in place for them instead of basing their decisions and behaviour on personal choices as an individual citizen.

“The events of September 11, 2001, have sparked a fierce debate over racial profiling. Many who readily condemned the practice a year ago have had second thoughts.” (Gross, Livingston 1413)

The thought that people are capable of hi-jacking airplanes and flying them into buildings in America in the 21st century is scary. When people get scared they get angry. When they get angry they want somebody to blame and direct their frustration at. The target of America’s (among many other countries including Canada) infuriation of the 9/11 attacks has been directed at Islamic people, considering those who planned out the events of September 11, 2001 were of this nationality.

This has caused an increasingly favoured view of racial profiling, with beliefs from some including that “it seems entirely appropriate to look harder at such people,” (Gross, Livingston 1414). After all, we have to protect the safety of our countries and people. How would it look in respect to the reputation of authorities and government if a repeat of 9/11 were to happen?

Question: Isn’t it better to violate the rights of some, and treat individuals wrongly based on their appearance in order to protect a greater number of the population?

Answer: NO.

September 11th happened over nine years ago and racial hostility towards Muslim people has still not noticeably declined.


Time to grow up

It is wrong to base an entire opinion about a nationality or religion on an isolated event and the actions of select individuals. Have we all forgotten what we were taught as children regarding not judging people based on their appearance? The “don’t judge a book by its cover” metaphor appears to currently be overshadowed by stereotypes and racism is just grown up bullying.

Racial Profiling: It's Time to Face the Truth

This video clearly states that racial profiling has never
been shown to make us safer, and includes several
shocking examples to prove the point.

I chose to include this video in my blog because it
demonstrates my argument and personal belief that
all people are equally capaable of crime regardless
of their race and the notion that certain minorities
are increasingly likely to behave in devient ways is
a social construction based on nothing but wrongful
assumptions and bias.

(#1) Los Angeles: In early August of the year 1969, five victims were brutally murdered by gun and knife. Hundreds of stab wounds were also uncovered.

(#2) September 1998: Police in Vancouver, B.C. begin reviewing dozens of files of missing women from the city’s Downtown Eastside.
December 9, 2007: A man is found guilty of six counts of second degree murder. This same man is charged with 20 further counts as well.

(#3) Three men were charged for committing a spree of bank robberies in 2007 that culminated in the death of an FBI agent.

Can you tell the race of the offender(s) who committed each of these crimes?

.... didn’t think so.

Here are the criminals who match up with the above crimes:
Offender #1 : Charles Manson
{white}



Offender #2: Robert Pickton
{white}



Offenders #3:
{Hespanic}
Wilfredo Berrios,
Efrain Lynn and
Francisco Herrera-Genao

The point of these criminal examples is to prove that members of one specific race is not increasingly likely to being a serial killer, bank robber, rapist or anyone who is a danger to society for that matter.

The nature of a crime committed has to do with personal choices, circumstances, mentality and a number of other factors – none of which include race.

This leads me to my next question; why when a man hides the dead bodies of many women in his farm are all farmers not then stereotyped and profiled? If instead of a caucasion, Robert Pickton had been a Muslim and instead of being a farmer he was a cab driver – how would this case have been used to target the Islam minority? The truth is though, that he is a white man, therefore his race was not punished for his actions, because white privilege would never allow that to happen.

An obvious solution that would force change to happen

A good start to making those in authority treat all diverse members of society (criminal, innocent or suspected) equally would be to include visible minorities as hired law enforcement. Yes, there are currently police officers who are not just white – but when you look at the statistics there is definitely room for improvement in including a range of nationalities among those who protect and serve.



In 2006, the Law Commission of Canada stated that "…in spite of concerted efforts to increase diversity in police services in Canada, women, members of visible and ethnic minority groups, as well as Aboriginal peoples, remain significantly underrepresented, compared to their representation in the communities being policed" (based on 1996 Census data). Data from the 2006 Census show that, for Canada as a whole, this continues to be the case for visible minorities and women.

Although this picture may look strange at first, I urge you to analyze why it forces you to do a double take - is it because there are hardly any officers of the Muslim nationality? The turban the clearly represents another culture? Is it the fact that a job that is so exclusively "Canadian" is being performed by somebody who does not appear to be born in Canada? If the reason was any of these suggestions, my point as to how minorities are not as readily included in law enforcement has been proven.