# Political Correctness and Racial Profiling **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 23, 2010, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639 "2010-11-23T05:38:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/161 "2010-11-29T12:58:08Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Actually, since there are no more than a handful of terrorist events involving aircraft worldwide in a decade, much less a year, seems to me that a relatively efficient system would rule out about 99.9999% of all travelers. But hey: if we accept your 10% figure, how many passengers is that? > > It seems that for the past several years combined US domestic and international boardings have hovered around 800 million per year. This would mean that the notional profiling scheme some are proposing here would require screening of at least 80 million people yearly to find, what, 2 or 3 potential terrorists? Hey, let’s say maybe 80 terrorists, even though that figure is almost certainly far too high. So, profiling is basically a million to one shot, and I’m willing to bet that the built-in inefficiencies of such scheme will deny boarding to thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of people who are no threat to anyone but don’t happen to look or sound right to the profiler. > > BTW, for everyone going on about how wonderful the Israeli profiling system is: any idea how many false positives it generates? I didn’t think so. > > Ok, so crappy as it is likely to be, profiling sounds, to some, more attractive than the current system, which attempts to screen nearly everyone who boards a plane for the same ridiculously small number of potential threats. It’s still wildly inefficent by any measure, and, just like the current system, turns presumption of innocence on its head, just now for some unfortunate, sloppily-defined subset of one group or another, instead of pretty much everybody. Sorry, I’m not overly impressed, especially since no here has yet defined how this profiling scheme would work, other than targeting people who ‘look muslim’ or ‘look Arab’ and, presumably, allowing TSA access to some gigantic Echelon-style NSA database. Are you sure that’s what you want? Are you sure I and my fellow citizens want to throw bundles of my tax dollars at it? The absolute number of terrorists trying to board airplanes in an effort to bring them down is so tiny that any system of screening at all generates false positives almost exclusively. Screening (of any kind) does reduce the effort in the first place, though. With no screening at all, I’m pretty confident terrorists would have brought down many planes if they could simply walk on with a bazooka and a couple hundred pounds of explosives. The reason I support profiling (including appearance-based profiling) is precisely because of the vast numerator of all flyers. It’s not possible to focus on everyone, and focusing on profiled passengers increases the probability of finding the needle in the haystack. You are looking through fewer haystacks. I do not particularly support the current TSA efforts with much of any enthusiasm. Not only are thy completely unselective–diluting out their focus onto passengers with minimal likelihood of belonging to terrorist groups–they appear to be rather marginally educated and rather more focused on rote process than any real expertise. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/162 "2010-11-29T13:07:55Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > But to use your analogy: > Suppose that in recent years almost all accidents resulting in death had been caused only by drivers of sports and muscle cars, . . . Your analogy proves my point. The shoe bomber was not Middle Eastern and the Detroit bomber was black. (And then there is the older case of the guy who planted a bomb in the luggage of his white, red haired, girlfriend.) So “all” incidents of airline terrorism have not been perpetrated by Middle Eastern young men, (or even “Middle Eastern looking” young men). I am not claiming that appearance should never play any role in any profile, but focusing on appearance, (or making silly claims that “all” the carriers of bombs have been members of a particular ethnicity or region), are simply wrong and focusing on appearance will cause TSA to harrass innocents, needlessly, while allowing actual perpetrators to pass through. Your “almost” does not actually carry any weight because we have no metric for “almost” and I have provided multiple exceptions without even bothering to do a Google search on the terrorists about whom we have information. The thread is discussing “racial” profiling and that behavior is counterproductive. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/163 "2010-11-29T13:09:41Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > I didn’t say they were on average brown. You said it when you linked to your photos. > Phenotype? This shows your basic ignorance. As I have to keep repeatedly pointing out, there is no Middle Eastern phenotype. There is everything from blond hair, blue-eyed to brown-eyed, black haired. I realize you have to keep pretending that Middle Easterns look the same in order for the racist system you want to implement to come to fruition, but that doesn’t make your fake statements true. I wonder if you’d enter into a wager where we take a general population of all flyers in line for screening and let me–well-traveled the world over, but untrained–separate out for you Middle Easterners (and by the way, that is not the only group I’d add to appearance-based profiling). I get to look at every passenger, look over their ID, and ask them one or two questions, followed by parking them into “Middle Eastern” or not. While it’s absolutely true that I would miss some and incorrectly include others, I’d wager my “Middle East” group would contain a far higher percentage of Middle Easterners than my “Everyone Else” group. And that’s what appearance-based profiling is all about. It’s not a statement about your life philosophy. It’s not an accusation you are a criminal. It’s about trying to whittle down the denominator of every single passenger into a more manageable number that is more likely to contain the tiny subset which needs to be prevented from getting on the airplane. A trained profiler would have a far higher success rate than I and obviously a more inclusive (and exclusive) list of profiling criteria beyond the “Middle Easterner” strawman you keep setting up. But the idea that profiling based on appearance is unhelpful at all is silly. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/164 "2010-11-29T13:12:32Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > If you disagree and you were there , you are an idiot. Find a better way to express your displeasure in the future. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/165 "2010-11-29T13:30:41Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Your analogy proves my point. The shoe bomber was not Middle Eastern and the Detroit bomber was black. (And then there is the older case of the guy who planted a bomb in the luggage of his white, red haired, girlfriend.) So “all” incidents of airline terrorism have not been perpetrated by Middle Eastern young men, (or even “Middle Eastern looking” young men). I am not claiming that appearance should never play any role in any profile, but focusing on appearance, (or making silly claims that “all” the carriers of bombs have been members of a particular ethnicity or region), are simply wrong and focusing on appearance will cause TSA to harrass innocents, needlessly, while allowing actual perpetrators to pass through. > Your “almost” does not actually carry any weight because we have no metric for “almost” and I have provided multiple exceptions without even bothering to do a Google search on the terrorists about whom we have information. The thread is discussing “racial” profiling and that behavior is counterproductive. Again, you are setting up a strawman of “exclusively.” I used your example because it was your example, not because it was a perfect analogy. To date w/r/t airplane terrorism, all successful and nearly-successful terrorists have been extremist Muslims on their personal crusade. I’m not sure who has claimed they are a particular ethnicity, although there have been some implications that blonde and blue-haired women should be considered equally at risk. Much of appearance-based profiling is exclusion rather than inclusion. A little less focus on the Amish Grandma in her buggy than the teenager in Dad’s Maserati, for example; a little less focus on a teenage female bimbo than a nervous Somali. I’ve already said that if the thread is confined to “racial” profiling, that’s useless. I don’t think it was the intent of the OP to mean it that way. Read my initial post. I do think appearance as one of many screening criteria is a useful adjunct. So, for instance, some blue-eyed blonde women might attract the eye of a professional profiler based on some subtle appearance or behavioural cue; the next might be dismissed with barely a second glance. And as threats change, so would criteria. I’m aware of many anti-government terrorists who don’t meet standard appearance criteria, but not many who are nutty enough to get on airplanes and kill themselves along with the passengers. That particular subtype seems to be the domain of extremist young Muslim males serving the Army of God or hoping for their virgins. But if something about [this person’s](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://static-p3.fotolia.com/jpg/00/09/53/38/400_F_9533836_IYnXSj75nQ9AZwFnC2kXLE6Vn2IuLxVT.jpg&imgrefurl=http://en.fotolia.com/id/9533836&usg=__Qvf2b6yRE9t5EGhawv5BuQa_Agk=&h=400&w=267&sz=23&hl=en&start=0&sig2=2X-9ib-thpTc5DwjLDVIKw&zoom=1&tbnid=Yi2Ca-vzOucwUM:&tbnh=166&tbnw=115&ei=hqrzTLG0E4mnnQf67-n3CQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblond%2Bwoman%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1599%26bih%3D795%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=639&vpy=91&dur=1291&hovh=275&hovw=183&tx=94&ty=140&oei=hqrzTLG0E4mnnQf67-n3CQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=39&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0) appearance or behaviour smells wrong, by all means she gets further attention. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/166 "2010-11-29T14:13:13Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > I’ve already said that if the thread is confined to “racial” profiling, that’s useless. I don’t think it was the intent of the OP to mean it that way. Read my initial post. I do think appearance as one of many screening criteria is a useful adjunct. So, for instance, some blue-eyed blonde women might attract the eye of a professional profiler based on some subtle appearance or behavioural cue; the next might be dismissed with barely a second glance. And as threats change, so would criteria. I’m aware of many anti-government terrorists who don’t meet standard appearance criteria, but not many who are nutty enough to get on airplanes and kill themselves along with the passengers. That particular subtype seems to be the domain of extremist young Muslim males serving the Army of God or hoping for their virgins. But if something about [this person’s](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://static-p3.fotolia.com/jpg/00/09/53/38/400_F_9533836_IYnXSj75nQ9AZwFnC2kXLE6Vn2IuLxVT.jpg&imgrefurl=http://en.fotolia.com/id/9533836&usg=__Qvf2b6yRE9t5EGhawv5BuQa_Agk=&h=400&w=267&sz=23&hl=en&start=0&sig2=2X-9ib-thpTc5DwjLDVIKw&zoom=1&tbnid=Yi2Ca-vzOucwUM:&tbnh=166&tbnw=115&ei=hqrzTLG0E4mnnQf67-n3CQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblond%2Bwoman%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1599%26bih%3D795%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=639&vpy=91&dur=1291&hovh=275&hovw=183&tx=94&ty=140&oei=hqrzTLG0E4mnnQf67-n3CQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=39&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0) appearance or behaviour smells wrong, by all means she gets further attention. Based on what you have said here it sounds like racial profiling is not part of it at all. You are suggest we look for something “that smells wrong”, unless you are suggesting we do something with everyone who looks an extremist muslim whatever that looks like. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/167 "2010-11-29T16:09:28Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > Certainly there is no clear cut line, but it is not so fuzzy as you think. The police have it pretty clear cut. Yes, but I’d suggest the security services have a different remit and exist at the borderline of what is acceptable. Anyway, I think I’ve emptied my brain out on this one so I’ll leave it there. Uncertain, unsatisfactory and unresolved. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/168 "2010-11-29T16:30:49Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > That’s a problem ? Why? Why is it a problem that _everyone else_ might be a terrorist, but not your wife? I’m going to go out on a limb and speculate that most TSA agents are not as familiar with her as you are. How’s that? > [@acsenray](#): > > I hate to donthis, but it has gotten to the point that I can’t stand it any more – it’s **al Qaida** , not al Queda. It rhymes with “hi there” not “hey there.” _Al-Qaeda_ is the most common English transliteration, pronunciation issues aside. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/169 "2010-11-29T17:12:22Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Yes, but I’d suggest the security services have a different remit and exist at the borderline of what is acceptable. > > Anyway, I think I’ve emptied my brain out on this one so I’ll leave it there. > Uncertain, unsatisfactory and unresolved. So you make a claim that for some unknown reason security services has more of a reason to trash human rights with no explanation at all and then walk away? Wow. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/170 "2010-11-29T20:43:45Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > So you make a claim that for some unknown reason security services has more of a reason to trash human rights with no explanation at all and then walk away? > Wow. That would be pretty stupid of me wouldn’t it? good job I never made that claim isn’t it? Feel free to quote, in context, where I have. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/171 "2010-11-29T21:20:11Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > That would be pretty stupid of me wouldn’t it? good job I never made that claim isn’t it? > > Feel free to quote, in context, where I have. Well I am confused. You said: > [@](#): > > Yes, but I’d suggest the security services have a different remit and exist at the borderline of what is acceptable. > > Anyway, I think I’ve emptied my brain out on this one so I’ll leave it there. > Uncertain, unsatisfactory and unresolved. Please help me understand. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/172 "2010-11-29T22:07:54Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Find a better way to express your displeasure in the future. > > [/Moderating] Just what is wrong with my expression that it requires a moderator intervention ? ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/173 "2010-11-29T22:23:27Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > Please help me understand. Read the comment I was responding to and all will be clear. This > [@](#): > > So you make a claim that for some unknown reason security services has more of a reason to trash human rights with no explanation at all and then walk away? > Wow. Bears no relation to the points I was making and should you care to review what I have previously said you’ll realise that. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2010, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/174 "2010-11-29T22:28:44Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > That would be pretty stupid of me wouldn’t it? good job I never made that claim isn’t it? > > Feel free to quote, in context, where I have. > [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Read the comment I was responding to and all will be clear. > > Bears no relation to the points I was making and should you care to review what I have previously said you’ll realise that. I wrote and read what you were responding to. I am unsure how many steps back you are suggesting I need to read, but I fail to see the disconnect and am far from clear on what you mean. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/175 "2010-11-30T10:19:31Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > I wrote and read what you were responding to. I am unsure how many steps back you are suggesting I need to read, but I fail to see the disconnect and am far from clear on what you mean. Your reply suggests that I defend the rights of the security services to “trash human rights with no explanation at all” I don’t and never have. I acknowledge that they may come close to the line and feel they need to step over it depending on the circumstances but I don’t defend that. In fact I consistently condem it. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/176 "2010-11-30T14:24:17Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Your reply suggests that I defend the rights of the security services to “trash human rights with no explanation at all” > I don’t and never have. > I acknowledge that they may come close to the line and feel they need to step over it depending on the circumstances but I don’t defend that. In fact I consistently > condem it. As you feel my words suggested something and I felt your words did as well. A question on the sentence above. Is it you , they or both who feel they need to step over the line? It reads as you do, but I don;t want to assume and it could be understood either way. I am glad you defend civil rights. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/177 "2010-11-30T15:57:18Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > As you feel my words suggested something and I felt your words did as well. > > A question on the sentence above. Is it you , they or both who feel they need to step over the line? It reads as you do, but I don;t want to assume and it could be understood either way. > > I am glad you defend civil rights. Ah, the limitations of message boards I fear. They feel the need to step over the line. I understand why they feel pressured to do that but don’t condone it. I know it is a subtle step from “understanding” to “supporting” and message boards aren’t always the best place to clarify that. So my apologies if it wasn’t clear. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/178 "2010-11-30T16:02:49Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Ah, the limitations of message boards I fear. > > They feel the need to step over the line. I understand why they feel pressured to do that but don’t condone it. > > I know it is a subtle step from “understanding” to “supporting” and message boards aren’t always the best place to clarify that. So my apologies if it wasn’t clear. I understand you better now. No worries. I apologize as well. Of course I understand why they feel the need to. The same with police they often overstep their bounds and in most cases because they feel they need to. In both cases I condemn it. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/179 "2010-12-01T01:06:01Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > Just what is wrong with my expression that it requires a moderator intervention ? Calling another poster an idiot, even when camouflaged with a conditional expression, has never been permitted in this forum. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639/180 "2010-12-01T01:30:29Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Calling another poster an idiot, even when camouflaged with a conditional expression, has never been permitted in this forum. Just which poster could I have possibly conditionally called an idiot? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-correctness-and-racial-profiling/561639.md?page=10)