The definition of racial profiling is prejudging someone by their ethnicity or racial profile based on the stereotypes that an ethnic group may carry. Racial profiling acknowledgement in America has grown rapidly over time and has really been on the rise since the September 11, 2001 bombings of the Twin Towers in New York City and of the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia.
But is racial profiling defensible to the American public policy? Some people think like Scott Johnson and say yes law enforcement need to profile ethnic groups in certain situations in order to protect the streets effectively. On the other hand those such as David A. Harris who oppose Scott Johnson argues that racial profiling is a hindrance to the American justice system and will cause lower income communities to despise and detest the ones who are supposed to serve and protect them.
Scott Johnson is a conservative journalist and an attorney he is also a fellow at the Clermont Institute. Johnson says it is “Better Unsafe then (Occasionally) Sorry” which is the title of his passage in the American Enterprise in the January/February of 2003. Johnson argues that racial profiling is actually benefitting to the American society by profiling in airports and on highways law enforcement could do their job efficiently and safely. Johnson believes that if profiling tools are not implemented then America will fall prey to another attack similar to or worse than 9/11. Also he states that the use of profiling tools could expose potential threats at national borders and at visa offices as well. He also criticized David Harris’s clam that if law enforcement should stop focusing on Arabs, blacks, another minorities and should reroute their attention officials would discover that crimes and acts or terrorism that’s committed by whites go unnoticed and unpunished. Johnson says that law enforcement does keep records and statics of the racial identity of perpetrators in...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document