Racial profiling is a term society has become familiar with in the past few years; however, it is not a new phenomenon. Racial profiling according to Fredrickson, “occurs when law enforcement officials rely on race, skin color, and/or ethnicity as an indication of criminality, reasonable suspicion, or probable cause, except when it is part of the description of a particular suspect” (1). There are many opposing views on racial profiling; some believe it to be a useful tool used by law enforcement, while others believe it to be another way to discriminate against minorities. This paper sets out to examine racial profiling from its origin to present day, taking a look into both sides of the racial profiling issue to find what if any laws are in place to prevent racial profiling from taking place.
Racial discrimination is not a new phenomenon it can be traced back over one hundred years to slavery times. Dark skinned individuals have always been seen as inferior to that of the white man. Even after slavery was abolished there was still segregation; separate drinking fountains, restrooms, colleges/educational facilities and bus seats for blacks and whites. This mentality has carried over to law enforcement and is seen today in the form of racial profiling. Racial discrimination has been around almost as far as we can look back in history; however, we can see a clear beginning to racial profiling of individuals within law enforcement.
As previously stated racial profiling is not a new idea, one can clearly trace its roots back to the 1960’s when American commercial airliners to Cuba were being hijacked in high numbers. The United States government decided to step up and use profiling as a way to combat against air piracy. This effort was called the hijacker’s profile. The first action taken was the use of highly trained U.S. Marshall Servicemen on “high risk” flights to and from Cuba (Harris 19). On these flights the servicemen would keep an eye on those who looked suspicious, which were all poorly dressed Cuban men. According to the numbers this plan failed horribly. With eighteen planes being hijacked in 1968 and in 1969 there were forty attempts and thirty-three successful hijackings. So the government tried a new tactic, stop them on the ground (Harris 20).
The new method had a number of steps, each being more intrusive than the one before, to identify those who were most likely to hijack a plane. The government compiled a list of all the recent hijackers and their characteristics and used this as a template to search for what a hijacker may look like. The first step of a multi step process was, individuals that fit the profile of a hijacker had his or her boarding pass marked. Officials would then screen all the passengers with marked boarding passes with a magnetometer, while many passengers set off the meter because of its sensitivity to metal and in reality had nothing but coins or watches in his or her pockets. Officials would then screen all passengers with a magnetometer, while many passenger set off the warning signal the machines were set to detect guns but would also sound whenever a passenger carried other metal objects. Only those who both set off the detector and had a marked boarding card were single out for further inquiry. These passengers would be asked for id. If the answer to this was not as expected then further body and luggage searches were performed. This did nothing to eliminate hijacking of planes the numbers didn’t even drop. So in 1973 the government elected a new system. Everyone had to pass through a metal detector as well as their luggage passed through x-ray machines. This made a drastic cut in hijackings (90% drop). And no profiling was used, just the same measures for everyone. With this one can clearly see that racial profiling was implemented but did not work as it was expected to (Harris 21)
Over and over again on the news, radio, or by word of mouth we hear the stories of racial profiling by police, here are a couple of stories that show how dangerous racial profiling is, not just to the victims but to all those of “color” living within the United States. Mr. Garcia was targeted as he and his six-year-old son and eight-year-old daughter waited in the car for his wife. He was approached by a police officer that requested his identification. When he questioned the need to show his I.D., the officer became angry, cursed at him, and threatened to spray him with pepper spray. Mr. Garcia attempted to comply with the officer’s orders, but as he reached for his wallet, the officer sprayed him with mace, dragged him from his truck, struck him, and then arrested him. He describes the experience as traumatizing for both himself and his children, who watched in fear from the truck as the abuse took place (Heuman). One can imagine the view that Mr. Garcia’s children hold of law enforcement officers. They saw their dad being beat and maced at the hands of someone who is supposed to protect and serve them. Cases like Mr. Garcia’s are prime examples of why many in today’s society, especially those of color, lose faith in the criminal justice system and do not respect officers of the law.
Another example of racial profiling can be seen in the case of Mr. Elibiary who is an imam for the Muslim community in the City of Carrollton,Texas. On September 11, 2002, he was attending an outreach event at a mosque in the Islamic Institution of Richardson. Upon entering the mosque, Mr. Elibiary noticed police cars parked in front of the building and assumed they were there for protection. When Elibiary left the building the officers followed and stopped him because his vehicle registration tags had expired eleven days earlier. The police officers called for back up and began to search Mr. Elibiary’s car. Mr. Elibiary was arrested and his computer and camcorder were confiscated. He was taken to the police department where he was questioned about his university degrees, the ethnic background of his wife, and his financial and employment status. Furthermore, officers asked for Elibiary’s password to search through his personal computer. When he refused the police asked whether he had something to hide. Mr. Elibiary describes the encounter as both scary and unnecessary (Heuman).
In the past few years the issue of racial profiling has become a predominant issue for state and federal law enforcement agencies. Agencies have been scrutinized for the lack of laws prohibiting stops of individuals based on race and ethnicity. We, the public, have seen and heard of numerous cases of police violence on individuals of color. Racial profiling has been around before the attacks on the World Trade Centers; however, the cases of profiling have seemed to heighten after 9-11 as opposed to hearing of African-American discrimination it has now turned to those of Arabic decent.
Different individuals hold different opinions of racial profiling, many believe it is a useful tool using the rationale that most African-Americans or Arabic individuals that they stop have warrants out for their arrest or are currently involved in some sort of illegal activity. This they claim is reason enough to allow racial profiling to continue, they believe it keeps the streets safer and it is a step in the right direction to squashing terrorism. I spoke to a law enforcement officer, Mr. X (he wishes to remain unnamed), who works for a smaller county precinct in Ohio. When I asked him if he saw racial profiling as a problem he responded with “no” (Mr. X Personal Interview). I then asked why he did not see it as a problem, he responded by saying “because those people come to our country and think that they own the damn place and that they can do whatever they want” (Mr. X Personal Interview). I then asked do you, yourself or any of your fellow officers use racial profiling, he said that yes, both he and some of his fellow profile and will continue to do so as long as he is a cop because these people ten to one are criminals and he will make up a reason to pull them over (Mr. X Personal Interview). On the other hand, there those who believe in civil rights and that each and every individual has the freedom to live without the harassment of law enforcement constantly lingering in the back of his or her mind. These individuals hold the opinion that racial profiling is just another way to discriminate against minorities within the US (Balkin). The United States Government tends to agree with those who believe it is a form of discrimination, thus allowing State and Federal agencies to take active roles to eliminate or to lessen the occurrence of racial profiling by law enforcement agencies.
On June 9, 1998 the Transportation Equity Act (TEA) was passed, which was the first federal racial profiling provision. The TEA included a provision that allows states to apply for federal funds up to sixty million over six years to develop racial profiling laws, to maintain racial data of vehicle stops by police and to train law enforcement officers so that they do not make stops on the basis of race. The provision contained tough requirements for qualifying for the federal grant funding, including a state law prohibiting the use of race or ethnicity of drivers or passengers to any degree in making traffic stops. Also a state must maintain racial and ethnic statistics on each and every vehicle stopped (Pampel).
More recently in February of 2001 in an address to a joint session of Congress, President George W. Bush declared that racial profiling is “wrong and we will end it in America” (MacDonald). With this he directed the Attorney General to review the use of racial profiling by Federal law enforcement authorities. The Attorney General, in turn, instructed the United States Department of Justice (USDJ), Civil Rights Division to come up with a guide to eliminate racial profiling by setting guidelines for National Security, Border Integrity and Tradition State and Federal Law Enforcement Authorities (O’Reilly). The USDJ Civil Rights Division soon turned in a proposal that utilized the Constitution to make racial profiling illegal for law enforcement. The Department also set up a division that would specifically deal with all complaints of racial profiling in a timely and orderly fashion. This gave some citizens hope of fair treatment by law enforcement and also a place to report incidents to if he or she was a victim of racial profiling.
Along with State and Federal laws against racial profiling some police departments have enacted their own policies on profiling. Many use the keeping of statistics as a sort of check on officers. Also, some have established a no tolerance policy in regards to racial profiling meaning that if an officer is suspected of profiling and the suspicion is proven then that officer will be immediately relieved of his position with the department. This along with more education/training is a good step in the right direction for agencies (Free).
If these attempts at eliminating racial profiling do not work it will drastically affect all those of color living within the United States. These individuals will be afraid to travel on planes, drive down the street, walk on the sidewalk, even go to a place of worship for the fear of police harassment. This will also affect those individuals from other countries thinking of relocating to the United States. If these individuals hear of the hardships faced by people of ethnicity they will be reluctant to move his or her families to the United States. This is a concept that the US government understands thus the reason for the focus on laws to prevent racial profiling.
Although, one can see that the United States is actively attempting to eliminate racial profiling, one can also clearly see that racial profiling is not an issue that can be solved overnight. It does and will take time for laws to be implemented, training to be done, and reports to be followed up on. In the mean time society must focus on uniting as one and to stop blaming those of a different race or ethnicity for all that is wrong with our society by doing so it harder for racial profiling to exist. Education of discrimination and racial profiling starts at home. Individuals must teach tolerance and respect for all, not just white Americans. Agencies must also continue to punish officers that are suspected to be using racial profiling with the hope that it will deter fellow officers from profiling. With all of these steps, hopefully, racial profiling will began to fade and will be just a memory in the history of law enforcement agencies.
Worked Cited
Balkin, Karen. Civil Rights. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004.
Blackwood, Bill. LEMIT Responds to Racial Profiling. 2001. 10 April 2005
http://www.shsu.edu/~lemit/RACIAL%20PROFILING%20DOC%.html.
Fredrickson, D. Racial Profiling: Eliminating the Confusion. Springfield: Charles
C. Thomas Publishers, 2002.
Free, Marvin. Racial Issues in Criminal Justice: The Case of African Americans.
Westport: Praeger Inc, 2003.
Harris, David. Profiles in Injustice. New York: The New Press, 2002.
Heuman, Milton. Good Cop, Bad Cop: Racial Profiling and Competing Views of
Justice in America. New York: P. Lang, 2003.
MacDonald, Heather. Are Cops Racist? Chicago: I.R. Dee, 2003.
Mr. X. Personal Interview. 14 March 2005.
O’Reilly, James. Police Traffic Stops and Racial Profiling: Resolving Management,
Labor and Civil Rights Conflicts. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas, 2002.
Pampel, F.C. Racial Profiling. New York: Facts on File Inc, 2004.
