Profiling problem

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Is it only around me, or is this problem everywhere. The minute the word "profile" pops up, the room gets quiet. "We're not allowed to profile" everyone says. Bulls**t! You can't racially profile. People forget we criminally profile every day. If you get a description from a robbery of a white male, are you going to be stopping a black guy wearing the same clothes?! Absolutely not. Is this same mindset in place where you are?

[Niteshift]

While you are correct that racial profiling and criminal profiling are COMPLETELY different (some people can't understand that)...........

"If you get a description from a robbery of a white male, are you going to be stopping a black guy wearing the same clothes?!"

That's no kind of profiling at all. It's simply being observant and using common sense.

[Sotex]

Some people, who should really know better, just wet their pants at the words "profiling" and "liability". Really irritates me sometimes. Sheeple in cops's clothing.

[Naomi]

Racial profiling makes sense to me. So does youth profiling, poor profiling, and male profiling. The group that commits more crimes per person deserves more attention from the police.

[FLLawdog]

No, I don't agree. Just because more crimes MAY be committed by one segment of the population than another doesn't mean that ALL members of that segment are committing the crimes.

[Jingwa]

A reminder.

A profile is a "set of data...portraying the significant features of something."

A set of data means MORE THAN ONE piece of information. A "profile" based solely on race, therefore, cannot exist.

Just another media oxymoron.

[ 11-28-2001: Message edited by: Jingwa ]

[Naomi]

"Just because more crimes MAY be committed by one segment of the population than another doesn't mean that ALL members of that segment are committing the crimes."

You're right.
But what you describe is bias, not profiling. To profile is to use factual information to reasonably characterize something. To bias is to characterize without facts or reason.

[Dinosaur]

As generally perceived, racial profiling is a bad thing. We're not likely to change that perception by arguing semantics. It is what they think it is. The police cannot be seen as making excuses, or providing rationale, for a bad thing.

A patterned response has developed to address the issue: Past reporting methods did not adequately address the matter of probable cause for pedestrian and vehicle investigations. Future policy will correct the problem.

That just means more paperwork, it's not a paradigm shift.

[Naomi]

What is bad about focusing more police attention on the groups that commit more crimes per person?

[Jingwa]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dinosaur:
As generally perceived, racial profiling is a bad thing.

In Wednesday's edition of the Wilson County (Tx) News, a black reporter offered his article in the Opinion section in support of "racial profiling", referencing Sept. 11. I'd like to know if anyone else has observed possible examples of some shifting in popular opinion.

We're not likely to change that perception by arguing semantics.

Yet arguing semantics can sometimes help turn chaos into order. By allowing "racial discrimination" to be called "racial profiling", a sudden "law enforcement evil" was created, special interest groups and the media were handed a new weapon of mass hysteria, and redundant/unnecessary laws have been the result. A backlash that may have been avoided with a bit of semantic discussion.

It is what they think it is.

Until you educate them.

The police cannot be seen as making excuses, or providing rationale, for a bad thing.

True. My point is not that racial discrimination has a rationale or deserves excuses. It is the "profiling" label that has done more harm than good, IMO.

A patterned response has developed to address the issue: Past reporting methods did not adequately address the matter of probable cause for pedestrian and vehicle investigations. Future policy will correct the problem.

The existence of a problem is perceptual. When it's discovered that owners of red in color vehicles are searched disproportionate to their ownership ratio, will they, too have a valid complaint, cause for restitution, and legal recourse?

That just means more paperwork, it's not a paradigm shift.

Sure it is. When I (or my department) has to collect new data to disprove the POSSIBLE existence of a wrongdoing, the paradigm has definitely shifted.

[Dinosaur]

I can't entirely disagree with you, Jingwa. Your points, for the most part, are valid. They reflect a measure of idealism that is admirable.

I tend to be more pragmatic: Deal with the issue, learn from it, adapt, and move on.

I think most in LE recognize the accusations as a cheap shot. Our own statistics were used against us. We probably should have seen it coming. Our initial contact reports always included racial data. They seldom focused on probable cause. So we learn something that, in hindsight, we should have known all along.

I don't see a requirement to include PC information on a vehicle or pedestrian investigation report as a real paradigm shift. We've always had to cover our butts.

[Jingwa]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dinosaur:
I can't entirely disagree with you, Jingwa. Your points, for the most part, are valid. They reflect a measure of idealism that is admirable.
I tend to be more pragmatic: Deal with the issue, learn from it, adapt, and move on.

I don't disagree. I think we merely view the situation differently. I would prefer to deal with the issue on a broader scale first, in this case by defining the perceived problem with accuracy. My point was that if "racial profiling" had been addressed as a concern already defined by discrimination, there would have been less of a frenzy and unwarranted backlash. The recent political climate (cowing to certain minority and liberal activism) and lack of backbone obviously (to me) prevented this from happening.

I don't see a requirement to include PC information on a vehicle or pedestrian investigation report as a real paradigm shift. We've always had to cover our butts.

It appears we are referring to two different enforcement actions here. My concern is with criminal law enforcement stops in the state of Texas. The result of the recent "racial profiling" boogeyman has been a definite paradigm shift for this issue in this area.

[Dinosaur]

I agree again, Jingwa. There's probably little common ground for a debate between us on this issue. I suspect that if we worked in the same area it would be easier to relate the issue to subjective experience.

I'm an urban cop in the East. Profiling accusations became a concern for us quite some time ago. In some respects, I regard the issue as BTDT, got the T-Shirt.

[EPD209]

I am from NJ ....the state that sparked off the whole profiling issue....Its all about perception....The NJ State Police were out there doing very aggressive drug interdiction...They bought alot of their collars on the turnpike into our municipal jail.....A good grab every night pretty much....Well certain members or certain groups became imbittered because alot people from certain ethnic and minority groups were being arrested...A shooting on the Turnpike involving two troopers and certain minority groups set off a protest....So certain members of certain groups got together and invented the term racial profiling....Now here in NJ every time you do a traffic stop....You have to fill out cards with the racial or ethnic group you are stopping...and better not have too much of one group.... There are bills attempting to be passed here in NJ making racial profiliing a 4th degree crime...All it really is is liberals catering to certain groups....This resulted in the NJ state Police pretty much shutting down and doing nothing...you can probaly drive 95 mph on the turnpike now and the worst they will do is waive to you....The best accusations were racial profiling at night...How can anyone see the occupants of a vehicle traveling in moving traffic at 80mph at night..I know I cant unless you have infrared built into your eyes..

[Dinosaur]

If all you're doing, EPD, is ensuring that racial data is being properly recorded, you will not be properly prepared to answer an allegation of profiling. In fact, you may very well provide supporting "evidence".

Documentation of probable cause for all contacts is the only way to go. If you can't justify a stop based on reasons other than race, you're not paying attention.

[Jingwa]

Originally posted by Dinosaur:
<STRONG>Documentation of probable cause for all contacts is the only way to go. If you can't justify a stop based on reasons other than race, you're not paying attention.</STRONG>

Dinosaur,

I didn't really address this point because for years we have documented the PC for all stops, either with a citation/warning book or log.

It appears to me that you have an insight into some writing on the wall that I may not be grasping. Would you please explain? For the sake of my interest, why is it necessary to document the PC for each stop in addition to race, etc., if no enforcement action is taken?

[Dinosaur]

An advocate, seeking to uncover a pattern of racial profiling, will secure from your department the paper record of all traffic and pedestrian stops, arrest reports, traffic citation records, and complaint logs. Racial data will be obtained and a ratio revealed. This ratio will be compared against other pertinent statistics, real and contrived, to assess your culpability. It's a surefire method.

Unless you are able to prove that race was not a factor in any decision to arrest, detain or investigate someone, you cannot effectively counter such a tactic. Arguing that racial profiling is just a misunderstanding won't work. Pointing out that race, under certain circumstances, is a legitimate descriptor won't cover all your bases. A case in point is the ex-chief of the NJ State Police. He was fired for attempting to explain why the perception exists. It didn't matter that he made some valid points. Some were similar to those I've read here.

Of the records I mentioned above, the Ped and Vehicle investigation reports are the most vulnerable. They often just record the most basic of data: date, time, location, name, DOB, description (including race), etc. They typically contain the least information relative to PC. If you haven't been including it, you should. Training is a must.

Reasonable suspicion for frisks of pedestrians and warrantless searches of vehicles is another area that is seeing a great deal of scrutiny. Now is the time to address that concern. Once again, the solution is effective documentation.

[EPD209]

Bottom line Dinosaur...your own data will be used against you in the end...If you work in a black neigborhood...a good portion of your traffic and pedestrian stops will be black .so now you get an IA beef or worse it goes to the persecutors office they take your data and use it against you not taking into account where you work......or a anti police group gets a hold of it....and says your dept only stops blacks....Thats exactly what happened with the NJ State Police...What if you are running radar and just happen to stop 10 black violators and someone makes an IA beef....In NJ especially in my county they are out on a witch hunt with this stuff..Two guys I work with have been jammed up already..I have no problem with documenting stops and PC but when its used against you thats another story....In NJ...roll up your windows and go hide..and bring alot of reading materials to work..thats what a good majority of cops are doing in this state

[Dinosaur]

A lot of cops have reached the same conclusion as you, EDP. "I can't get in trouble if I do nothing", is an old saying. Much older than the phrase, "racial profiling". It's defeatist and lame, IMO. Adaptability is a job requirement. It isn't all fun.

If you work a black neighborhood, most, if not all, of your daily activity will involve black subjects. I know many cops in that situation. I've heard some say they've been tempted to stop the rentmen and cable guys in order to balance their statistics. Real profiling to combat the presumption of profiling {ironic, isn't it?). The fear is largely unfounded. I know of no instance where an individual officer in such circumstance has actually been charged with racial profiling. All of them worry, though.

If your radar equipment just happens to focus on a specifc minority every night, you may have a problem. I'd have to blame the hardware.

This too will pass, EPD. If you like being a cop, hang in there. Somebody's gotta do it, right? It just gets worse and you get used to it. :)

[ 12-01-2001: Message edited by: Dinosaur ]

[Mike Tx]

One question I have and to put it in perspective so you won't think I'm picking on you, I fully believe that racial profiling is a bunch of bull. I think some politicians, to garner votes, have pandered to certain groups who cry that they are unfairly targeted by police. So, when you pretty much see law makers passing laws that prohibit you from doing your job, and in doing that, people get hurt because you do let people go 95 on the hiway, and you don't stop some guy because he might complain and you'll lose your job, why do you do it? I understand some people feel a calling to be in LE. But many times it must be very depressing to have what seems like everyone against you. There must be some other jobs that pay more, and some people could get those jobs and just say to hell with being in LE. I think that's what I would end up doing in I were in LE. I hate people always badgering me about doing the right thing. Now I do realize there are bad LEOs just like there are bad anything else, but in my opinion, some of the things that have happened are totally unjustified, like what happened after the shooting in Cinncinatti for one. I wouldn't blame the police for having sick outs or strikes or whatever. I just wonder why you take so much crap? I'm not trying to **** you off or whatever, I really just do wonder sometimes. I can see having a long time on the job and wanting retirement, but what other reasons are there?

[ 12-01-2001: Message edited by: Mike Sullivan ]

[Mike Tx]

For what it's worth I hate my job too because of the people I deal with. Most of them are morons. 99 percent of the people who let me work on there cars depress me to the point that I can't stand to talk to them. Sometimes I just have to have my wife deal with them. It's so bad that I don't ask people who come in how they are doing anymore becase most of them tell me they were ok until they had to come see me. One woman told me that I personally ruined her kids Christmas because I charged her to fix her car. I told her I was glad I ruined her Cristmas and that I hated kids. &*^#%$!

I'd like to do something else and I may, I'm just not sure how to go about it yet. I've been doing this 22 years, and there is no retirement. Oh yeah, and helping people is bad. Everyone, EVERYONE I have 'helped' by letting them owe me for repairs has not paid me. About 7 people so far. This one guy is a 'friend'. He still takes ocean cruise vactions with his fat wife and goes hunting every other weekend, but this lousy bastard can't pay me what he owes me.

Have I taken this off topic? Damn! Sorry for that! LOL! So next time you stop some red headed stuttering fat mechanic for speeding just let him go, because he can't afford it, and he'll KNOW you profiled him!

[EPD209]

Dinosaur.....I agree with you ...but the forms we fill out only support racial data say not too much else...It also says what traffic violations we stopped for...Bottom line..I dont know how the atmosphere is where you work..probaly alot more relaxed than here in NJ...I havent heard any troopers or police from Pennsylvania on the news being accused of this yet..Mike Sullivan was totally right in that this racial profiling thing was just made up by an interest group....I do like being a police officer ..Its a great job...Has its ups ..alot of downs lately...My dept is horrible...I have been looking to other states and agenices where I can go out and do my job right...If I didnt care there would be no problem sitting with your windows rolled up parked somewhere..But I do care and alot of guys do...But losing your job and causing a protest or being called to the carpet because of some stupid statistics in just not worth it...As I said there are bills on the floor now making racial profiling a crime.....This is just the start of a witchunt on cops..But guess what after sept 11th cops are popular again so things may turn around...I am hoping anyway

[Jingwa]

One thing I'd like to add.

Not long ago a few criminal law enforcement officers and I were discussing profiling, politicians and the law. Someone referenced a Federal court case, possibly Supreme Court, which basically stated that an agency has no responsibility to keep this type of information, or disseminate the information to anyone who requests it. The idea was that "wrongdoing" had to be established by a plaintiff before any of this would be required.

Does this sound familiar to anyone? A link would be appreciated. If I find it first, I'll post it.