Is racial profiling a justifiable and effective means to combat terrorism?

Question

Is racial profiling effective in confronting terrorism? Is it in violation of the 14th amendment's Equal Protection Clause? In your opinion, is it morally justifiable?

Answer 1

In addition to being a violation of the 14th Amendment, it's not effective and often counter-productive.

Focusing on just one obvious racial group ignores all the other fanatics. Not to mention that many terrorist organizations recruit people from their target countries, who blend right in along with everyone else. So, right there, your proposed system would have failed to catch most of the problems.

Airport security is primarily for the peace of mind of the travelers. A competent terrorist can always find a way to get something on board that can do the trick.

Racial profiling won't stop the problem. Any more than having people take off their shoes before going through the scanners did. Security measures are designed to give travelers peace of mind, and they focus mainly on whatever the latest problem was because that's what people are worried about now.

The only thing that has any possible chance of even slowing down airline terrorist activity is to make it so difficult for the terrorists to tell what gets scrutinized that they can't take obvious steps to avoid it. The more predictable your security measures are, the easier it is to get past them.

Profiling doesn't help. But if you absolutely want to guarantee that the next few terrorist attacks succeed, then by all means. Focus on just one obvious subset of the population and ignore all the rest.

Answer 2

Racial Profiling Justified

Answer 3

Profiling purely on physical appearance is both stupid and ineffective. Very simply because only a tiny fraction of people of Middle Eastern appearance are actually terror suspects.

Now, profiling based on behavior is both intelligent and effective. When a trained observer looks past physical appearance (which crimminals of all types may try to change) he or she will pick up the tell-tale cues that something is not right.

Forget about legal or moral considerations. From an anti-terror perspective, it's just plain DUMB!

Answer 4

It sure as hell beats out RANDOM profiling which is what we are doing now.

As far as 14th amendment is concerned, a person checked at the airport is not deprived of his rights, in fact before you fly you agree to be searched anyway. They can search EVERYBODY if they want to. So surely your rights are not violated by a search that you have consented too anyway, and could have been selected randomly for anyhow.

Answer 5

Never if that is the case every negative stereotype about a particular racial group would become legal, and grounds for violating their rights equal protection under the law.

Answer 6

Of course. Has anyone seen anyone but Islamic terrorists trying to blow up planes, trains and buildings lately. I really don't think security services need to spend their time checking other people as close just to keep the racial profiling sheet in line. Get realistic. If I tell you I'm going to kill you and you know I am a middle aged white male are you going to spend your time checking Hispanics or be on the lookout for a old fat white guy? Common sense has to be used occasionally

Answer 7

If you were walking in a dark alley and saw an older woman coming toward you, you would act differently than if you saw a young man. Were you being sexist and judging someone on their age? I think it is morally justified but one must keep in mind that there is the small chance that there are those who do not match the profile.

Answer 8

I think so. It's got to be in context of course. A muslim/arab on a plane, or buying fertilizer and diesel should be checked out. Random surveilance and invasive tactics based SOLELY on race is'nt the same. That's harassment. The sad fact is, the cliche "Not all muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are muslim" is true. Profiling is'nt convicting one for being arab or muslim, it's checking them out because of a valid sociological fact.

Answer 9

it won't work. that wouldn't have helped bush save l.a.!

"Rather than use Arab hijackers, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed sought out young men from Southeast Asia whom he believed would not arouse as much suspicion," Bush said.

google l.a. terrorist plot... they will just blow something up with some 90 year old woman if we try that and we'll have to go back to this anyway. it isn't effective enough to justify morally.

Answer 10

Probably a violation but also effective, what would you rather do protect their rights or blow up?