"Operation Pipline" and racial profiling

[cadet]

I am writing a research paper (due Friday!) for a criminology class I am currently enrolled in. The question I am proposing is this:

[Niteshift]

Short answer: No. Some will disagree, but we're talking about drug interdiction here, not some mope in a neighborhood at 3am.

I work drug interdiction and teach classes on it. My training has come from several sources including the DEA, FL Highway Patrol, WA State Patrol, WI State Patrol, Texas DPS, OK Highway Patrol, MCTFT, RCTA, IPTM, US Customs and classes put on by other agencies. Not one of them taught profiling.

I teach that profiling is a tool for lazy cops. Since males and females between 15-75 and of every racial/ethnic group have been arrested for smuggling, if you limit yourself based on a profile, you're missing dope. Period.

BTW, I noticed you used "Operation Pipeline" in your title. I attended Operation Pipeline and Convoy training in 1998. While the DEA did, at one time, teach profiling, it doesn't teach profiling now. In fact, in 1998, long before the current media exaggerations began, they were teaching that if you profile, you're missing dope.

------------------
Niteshift-
Perseverate In Pugna

[FLLawdog]

Hey, Cadet. Thanks for the question, and hopefully I can help a little. As far as statistics on profiling and success vs. failure, I can't give you an honest answer. Personally, I follow Niteshifts feelings, that if you follow a "profile", you're limiting yourself big time.

I can also, from personal experience, tell you what it does the department when things go bad...the morale, the relationship with the citizens and the stigma of the type of agency you're portrayed as by the media. It's not fun at all. You're almost afraid to admit that you're a member of it and that no matter what good you do, you're still viewed as an animal.

As a result of that, members of the department start laying blame on other members, they start laying blame on others and the agency divides. You have distinct factions, and everytime someone in this faction does something and gets away with it, it's viewed as "well, he's a Golden Boy, that's why.". Or, "maybe if I had the connections he does, I'd have gotten away with only a verbal reprimand for...". It goes on and on.



------------------
FLLawdog
"Never try to teach a pig to sing...it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."

[DesertRat]

As Nite said, they used to teach the profiling for drug interdiction including race as one of the indicators. In it's time, it had a purpose. The current craze on racial profiling has nothing to do with drug interdiction and to be perfectly honest, the bone heads trying to use it in the race politics of today are a couple of decades late. Case in point.

I am a racial profiler. How do I know. I have a current IAB beef accusing me of such. This is how it works. I'm pulling from a curb following a car stop. Keep in mind, I am a motor cop. My #1 job is DUI enforcement. As I pull out West bound, I just catch a brief look at an East bounder going about 10 under speed limit with his right tires in the curb drain. I make a u-turn to get behind him and he immediately makes a right hand turn into a residential area. It is 10:00 PM and I got no look at the driver. I turn behind him. The road makes a 90 degree left curve. As he makes the curve, he goes almost completely to the left half of the roadway. With this, I make the stop. I approach, staying behind the driver's door because it is very dark. I ask him "where are you going back here?" to determine his orientation to time and place
(DUI 101). He says I'm turning around to go to work. First thought in my mind is he was already on a major thoroughfare. Does he always go the wrong way to work first then turn around when a cop follows him. I comment that that seems a little unusual and just then move where I can see that he is a black male in a security guard uniform. He then turns immediately hostile. His next comment is "Your right, I'm looking for one of these houses to break into." and then the name calling began. I decide straight up this is a battle I'm not even going to get into let alone win. Get his paperwork, determine he is not DUI (I'm attributing his poor driving to DWO as I refuse to become overly cynical and make any other assumtions), drop a cite for fail to stay on right half of roadway on him to document the stop and his ID and get out of there.

That is the current definition of racial profiling. I made a stop for a traffic violation, conducted a brief investigation to determine if the driver was under the influence and issued a citation. All legal and proper and done politely with no other accusations of any type made. He assumed 1st, that I knew he was a black male driving, and 2nd, that I was stopping him because as a black male I must have assumed he was committing some type of non-traffic related crime. That is racial profiling of today.

Thanks, I've been needing somewhere to vent about this for days.

PS: I must assume your prof. doesn't understand the issue real well either if, as the question states, he/she assumes their is an agency somewhere today that is "support(ing) the use" of racial profiling.

PPS: I just noticed you were at The Point. My whole hearted congratulations and good lucks to you and your endeavors.

[This message has been edited by DesertRat (edited 11-30-2000).]

[This message has been edited by DesertRat (edited 11-30-2000).]

[This message has been edited by DesertRat (edited 11-30-2000).]

[awf]

I'm glad you asked this question. I have been in Law Enforcement for 7 years on the street. I have never been trained to racially profile. Most of my stops are made due to traffic violations. If not traffic violations then relation to calls such as suspect vehicle description. Prime example that is going to court, this is a true story. Officer sees a mini van traveling at about 50 m.p.h. in a 35 m.p.h. zone. It is about 3 a.m. and the van has tinted windows. As the officer turns around on the van, the van accelerates and weaves to the point that it almost strikes an oncoming vehicle. The officer activates overheads and the van accelerates again. The officer activates the siren and the van accelerates. The van finally stops outside city limits (this is a city officer). The driver is a black male driving an Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigations van. The van is marked on the doors with 3 inch letters. The driver is detained long enough to determine his validity as an O.S.B.I. agent then released. The agent has filed a racial profiling suit againt the officer. The officer is a white male. This is what some people define as racial profiling. I personally feel using racial profiling as a tool for drug interdiction does make your suspect catagory too narrow. I have arrested probably just as many white people as black for drug offenses. If anything I am profiling against white people because I normally give extra attention to trouble areas and I know the neighborhoods in my city. I look harder at a white person in a black neighborhood than I would a black person in a white neighborhood because I see more black people in white neighborhoods that are not committing offenses of any kind. Usually if there is a white person in a black neighborhood then they are normally buying dope or buying prostitutes.

[David]

Cadet,

As the others have stated, if someone profiles they are giving themselves a standing disadvantage.

When you are dealing with a male/female age: no minimum to no maximum, the chances of having drugs on them is either large or small or even none.

You have to treat them all the same...potential until proven different.

The same goes for threat level and most other situations you will find yourself in if/when you become a LEO.

You can become a statistic if you approach any of the above situations with any different attitude.

I got a little off track but I thought the addition was relavent. http://www.officer.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif

------------------
I'm lost...I've gone to look for myself. If I should return before I get back, please ask me to wait. Thanks, David!

[This message has been edited by David (edited 11-30-2000).]

[Underdog]

Hello,

I don't use racial profiling, I don't like racial profiling, and I clearly recognize the legal and ethical problems with racial profiling. In fact, I definately don't rely on race in the situation I am about to suggest. However, allow me to suggest a scenario where race might have some relevance.

An officer is on patrol at 0300 hours in what is, for all intents and purposes, an exclussively hispanic neighborhood. There is a particular street in this area where drugs are routinely sold by hispanic gang members. This activity is most prevalent during the late night and early morning hours. Everybody knows of this activity. The residents in the area have been complaining about the problem for years. The police department has made thousands of arrests for narcotics violations at this one location over the years. This officer has frequently made narcotics arrests at this location.

As the officer turns onto the problem street, he observes several young hispanic males with shaved heads running away. He observes a lone white male walking rapidly away from the same area.

What is the lone white male pedestrian doing in this area?

Okay, I recognize that this is a loaded scenario. There are many other objective factors that might reasonably justify a detention. However, the fact remains that much of good police work is simply recognizing patterns and deviations from patterns. Given the racial composition of this neighborhood, a white male pedestrian is likely to draw the attention of an observant police officer. In conjunction with the other involved factors, many reasonable police officers would conclude that this person is in the area for the purpose of purchasing illegal narcotics.

[dkiefner]

Here's a beauty.
http://rock.yahoo.com/rock/music_news/sonicnet/story.html?s=n/sonicnet/rock/news/20001130/20001130009

Lenny Kravitz detained briefly by Miami PD because he fit the desription of a robber and also had no ID. Now he isn't "sure" if he was a victim of racial profiling because some of the involved officers were latino.

The matter gets straightened out, and the officers apologize. So now he is considering legal action.

I've got a short response to all of this: http://www.officer.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif

[Niteshift]

Underdog, your example was exactly what I knew was going to come up. This arguement has come up before. Not that I have a problem at all with the scenario you gave, or how it's handled, but the question is really different.

The question did specify Operation Pipeline, so my answer was structure towards drug interdiction (I even mentioned that in the opening).

To me, the situation you gave as an example isn't profiling. Your training, experience and a combo of factors (neighborhood, time of day etc.) add up to reasonable suspicion, not racial profiling.

Driving down I-75 and stopping a guy only because he's black and northbound is racial profiling.



------------------
Niteshift-
Perseverate In Pugna

[Underdog]

Niteshift,

Sometimes I think it's racial profiling, sometimes I don't. If there's one thing I am certain of, it's that I am indecisive on this issue.

Seriously, there is a problem of definitions anytime a discussion of racial profiling arises. Some people argue that racial profiling is using race as the sole basis for a stop, others argue that it is using race as the main motivation for a stop, still others believe racial profiling exists where race is an element, no matter how minor, involved in the decision to stop.

While I don't pretend to be an authority on this issue, I suspect that the ACLU's position falls squarely within the third category. I do know that plaintiff's attornies routinely assert such a position against law enforcement defendants in civil rights cases. Finally, I strongly suspect that, in those agencies suffering under federal consent decrees, the DOJ operates on the presumption that the third category is correct.

I am familiar with a line of federal court cases based on the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In short, these cases hold that law enforcement officers may not use race as a factor to justify a detention unless race is a discriptive characteristic of a suspect involved in a particular crime. Hence, in the scenario I presented, an officer probably may not rely on race to justify a detention. (Still, I think that race will at least help to draw the attention of any reasonably observant cop given similar circumstances.)

In conclusion, I agree that racial profiling may not be relied on as an accurate predictor of criminal behavior. I routinely teach my probationary officers not to rely on race as a factor. I was simply attempting to point out a reasonable opposing argument.

[This message has been edited by Underdog (edited 12-01-2000).]

[CustomsCop]

In all my exposure to different agencies throughout my brief LE experience, I have NEVER seen someone on the receiving end of a LE action simply because they were of a particular skin color.

When are people like this prof going to step down out of the ivory tower and realize that we take LE action based on an observed violation of the law, not on skin color????

------------------
Fact is a function of evidence; Truth is a matter of perspective.

[Ksfuzz]

I agree with CustomCop, I too have never seen a stop based on the color of someones skin, and have never stopped someone just for the color of thier skin. When I make a stop, its for a violation of the law, or it's because I have at least a reasonable suspicion to stop them..ie, Citizen Tip (with lots of detail), etc...

Not to say that some officers don't stop just because of skin color, but I don't believe its anywhere as wide spread as the media and some people would make us believe.

[cadet]

All,
I would like to thank everyone for your replies and comments on this issue. My professor (a retired Army general and a former police commissioner of San Francisco) gave us complete freedom to write on whatever we wanted to, as long as it related to criminology and/or criminal justice. I chose the issue of racial profiling simply because it became such a controversy in my own county. Again, I thank you for your help and feedback. I also appreciate what you do for your cities, counties, states, and our great nation. You all are part of a profession that is often times thankless. I, along with many other patriotic citizens, thank you for your selfless service and numerous sacrifices.

Respectfully,
"cadet"