My Conclusions on Racial Profiling

Over the last few weeks I have read the details of cases of alleged racial profiling. My research has revealed an interesting, and somewhat complicated issue which goes beyond the issue of driving while black.

Often, what is reported as racial profiling does not neatly fit the definition. In many cases, police had legitimate reasons for focusing on one race. In Arkansas, police were looking for three men who broke into a home. Jason King fit the description of one of the men and was picked up, but released after confirmation that he was not the right man. In Toronto Jason Bogle was questioned by police who were investigating a murder. Again, the suspect was black. In Tampa, a minister was detained after setting off the alarms at a mall. In each of these cases, police had legitimate reasons for investigating these men. One could argue that none of these cases fit the definitions for racial profiling.

These cases have something else in common. In each case the victim describes a lack of respect from officers involved. Each spoke of how an apology would have been nice. The men felt they were treated as guilty persons, even after they were proven innocent. Perhaps had they received an apology, the issue would have been dropped. In each case police, acting on valid information, tainted their own actions by moving away from common decency.

After several weeks of focusing on this subject my definition of racial profiling has changed. My opinion however remains the same. The assumption of guilt based solely on race is wrong. Targeting one race in the hopes of reducing crime is wrong and does not reliably reduce crime rates. Law enforcement officers must remember to treat all with dignity, and remember a person is innocent until proven guilty. That being said, the combination of race with reasonable suspicion can and should be used in law enforcement and does not violate the true definition of racial profiling.