As it was meant to be. Obviously you don’t want to address any of the other points or questions I made. Instead, you just throw out veiled accusations of hatred and racism. If you are going to be insulting, at least get the spelling right.
Profiling is not meant to catch every criminal every time and it does not mean you don’t look at other leads.
The FBI profiles for serial killers. It so happens that most serial killers are white males between the ages of 25-40, usually loner types that aren’t usually married and act alone. But what of the Atlanta child murderer (black male) or the Hillside Stangler (actually 2 men acting together) or the I65 Murderer (a woman)? And Gacy was married and Gein was up there in years, what about them? That is why you don’t have tunnel vision when it comes to these things. However, profiling is a useful tool based on the history of known serial killers. 100% correct? No. Useful, absolutely.
Do you stop random searches? No. But, based on the known history of terrorists, you can isolate a certain segment of the population to check more thoroughly. But Osama can do “this” and Al-Queda can do “that”, blah blah blah. Yes, the can do all kinds of ridiculous and not so ridiculous things. Security must adapt, but it doesn’t mean to turn a blind eye to certain things either.
Ok. You came up with a this stupid analogy “If Osama finds a way to plant plastice explosives on dachounds because of their unique body structure, then we’d better look closely at ever weiner dog that goes on a plane. And that includes half weiner dogs and dogs name “Oscar Meyer” as well.”
so, now you want to wident eh net to include Not just people of middle eastern appearance, but people with middle eastern names as well.
FBI Profiling does not apply only to appearance. It takes in social habits, behaviour, things which take a while to search through.
Racial Profiling singles out all people with a certain skin colour as being a threat.
As I admitted, it was meant to be a stupid analogy. I shouldn’t watch TV while posting I suppose. Silly cellphone commercial in which 100 oxen are ordered but due to static 100 dachounds were delivered. Never underestimate the comedic value of stampeding weiner dogs. However, they do not make good analogy subjects.
Widen? I believe I stated from the very beginning that names should be included. If I widened the search parameters, it was to include sex and age. Two things you convieniently glossed over.
FBI profiling does include appearance though, doesn’t it? And airport security doesn’t have “a while”. Especially if they go through with your suggestion of searching every single person and every single bag. Talk about stupid and ridiculous.
It does include appearance, but it dosent assume that all white males are prospective serial killers.
Racial profiling does assume that all people of a certain skin colour are prospective terrorists.
No, it assumes that everyone is a potential serial killer but historically, the suspect would more than likely fall into certain statistical categories.
And for fuck’s sake, it is more than skin color. It includes sex, age, religion & country of origin.
The FBI uses existing information to help track a killer that has already done something and to prevent them from killing more people based on similar, past cases. You use past cases, compare it to the current facts, and try to project certain attributes of the killer based on statistical categories.
Racial profiling (and again, it’s more than just race here) operates on the basis that statistically, more terrorist actions are carried out by people that fall into certain categories.
You don’t. I’ll quote myself since you obviously have reading comprehension problems.
Yes, but they have already committed crimes, and the nature of the crimes determines who they are looking for. it takes a series of crimes by one person (or group) to devise a profile for that group to be caught.
Racial profiling assumes that people of a certain ethnicity are going to commit a crime, with no evidence that that person who is stopped is in any way criminal.
we are never going to agree on this. You obviously think its fine and dandy to assume that all people of a certain ethnicity, age and sex are would be terrorists (your “singing and dancing” post earlier) and I’ll just go on with my “rose coloured glasses” trying my best to argue against what I percieve as racism.
No it doesn’t assume that. It assumes that statistically, there is a greater chance that members of a certain group will commit a crime, more so than members outside that group.
Well that I can agree with.
The singing and dancing post was to show that a great many people grow up in an atmosphere or hatred towards all things American. That being the case, terrorists who act against America would more than likely come from those countries. Can you deny that there isn’t an atmosphere of hate being bred there? Are you saying that in most acts of terrorism against the US, the terrorists have not fallen into a certain ethnicity, age, religion and sex?
And no one is saying that one race is superior to another. In fact, Arab isn’t even a “race”. We are talking about people who appear to be from countries in which Islamic fundamentalism runs rampant. These happen to be mostly Middle Eastern countries. And you aren’t oppressing these people, locking them up or hanging them from trees. You are searching their persons and bags at airports because of where they fall into certain categories.
Where did I claim that profiling was fool proof? In fact, if you would read, you would see that I said when comparing terrorist profiling to serial killer profiling (Replace serial killers with terrorists): “That is why you don’t have tunnel vision when it comes to these things. However, profiling is a useful tool based on the history of known serial killers. 100% correct? No. Useful, absolutely.”
But to answer your points even though you are yet to answer mine:
Richard Reid. Male? Yes. Islamic? Yes. 20-35? Yes. Citizenship? No. Middle Eastern looking? Debatable, leaning towards no. He kind of looked like a dark hair, badly bearded Mr. Bentley from the Jeffersons to me.
As for Tim McVeigh acting alone, what’s your point? Neither did Ramzi Yousef, who tried the whole Ryder truck bomb 4 years earlier. Want to take a stab at which categories his co-terrorists fall into?
But, as I said, I never claimed that it’s 100% accurate or that it would catch every terrorist. However, it may act as a deterent.
When did I say the word “preventative”? In fact, I said you can only generally tell three of the five categories I named by looking at someone. I asked if you needed that explained sarcastically, I guess you really do. However, it’s hard to concentrate because my arm hurts from using the club on this equine. Although I don’t think he minds, he doesn’t seem to be breathing.
Preventative profile can be by appearance, as this is the quickest way to profile. Religion and I’m sure other categories are still part of terrorist profiles, however then can not be determined simply be appearance.
Yes they can dress in drag. Yes they can wear makeup to make the look older. Yes the can use children or the elderly. Again, this is not meant to be 100% effective.
Now that you won’t let this lie, please answer the following issues:
If you can present a feasible plan to check every single person getting on a plane, please do so.
So it’s the US’s fault that terrorism exists?
Do you have any cites of pro-america rallies in these countries where the shout “Huzzah America, long live freedom”?
Do you see everything in shades of gray?
Can you deny that there isn’t an atmosphere of hate being bred there?
Are you saying that in most acts of terrorism against the US, the terrorists have not fallen into a certain ethnicity, age, religion and sex?
Neither did Ramzi Yousef, who tried the whole Ryder truck bomb 4 years earlier. Want to take a stab at which categories his co-terrorists fall into?
And for the record, I don’t believe these terrorists represent and practice true Islam anymore than I believe that people like Chick & Phelps represent and practice true Christianity.
I asked you where Richard Reid fit into these categories.
you said
I replied
And instead of answering the question you go on about Preventative and Deterrance, and beating dead horses, as if your posts have been shining examples of clarity.
If religion is Undeterminable by appearance as you say, why did you include it as one of the categories the Richard Reid fell into that racial profiling could have stopped?
Its very simple. Every person passes through a metal detector and gets scanned by a hand scanner. It will add time onto the boarding time, but its a small price to pay for a safe flight. All baggage gets scanned also.
did I even imply that it was? Of course its not. You were trying to put words in my mouth, and build a strawman, so I left it without reply.
When was the last time there were Pro America rallies in any of the “Ally” countries? Hell, there are anti-capitalist rallies and anti-war rallies across the globe where America gets the brunt of the anger in almost every country, specially in Western countries.
Yes. I dont believe in Absolutes.
Yes, there is alot of hate towards America in these countries. But I dont think that makes assuming people from the region (regardless of what limiters you place on the selection) are terrorists justafiable.
yes they did, but I still do not believe that the actions of the few justify the profiling of them all.
[/quote]
Neither did Ramzi Yousef, who tried the whole Ryder truck bomb 4 years earlier. Want to take a stab at which categories his co-terrorists fall into?
[/quote]
You expected me to answer a sarcastic question? Yes, he fell into the categories you supplied, but you only know this AFTER the fact. You want to use these groupings to judge people in the future, regardless of their innocence, based on how they look.
I cannot support a policy that makes assertions about character or intent based on appearance.
So you are asking if profiling (it isn’t even racial) would have stopped Richard Reid? Is that what you are getting at? The answer to that is I don’t know, maybe, maybe not. If I were to hazard a guess, then probably not. So what is your point, or do you just want to point and say “See, I said that racial profiling wouldn’t work and you just admitted it!”. Problem is, I’ve stated time and time again that it isn’t 100% effective.
I said that terrorist acts commited against the US are typically committed by males of Middle Eastern origin, Islamic and between the ages of 20-35. What can you determine of someone while standing in line to get into the boarding area? Only three of these sex, age and geographic origin. So the part of profiling that can be preventative is sex, age and “race” as you like to call it. By using profiling, you now have a deterant as well, since now the terrorists will have to find different kinds of recruits. However, random searches are still in effect. It’s a two fold approach, but still must be open to adaptation.
Now, are you done nit picking? Are you going to answer any of those questions or are you going to continue to be deliberately obtuse?
I’d like to add on a question, maybe you’ll answer a question for a change. Is basing any action or precognition on race or skin color always bad?
