Fellow bloggers,
As most of you may know, racial profiling is a hot topic among politicians and average American citizens alike. "Racial profiling is a form of discrimination by which law enforcement uses a person’s race or cultural background as the primary reason to suspect that the individual has broken the law." an article on racerelations.about.com said. Though this might sound racist, I personally believe that racial profiling is appropriate to an extent. There is, however, a fine line between being cautious of certain races based on their background and just being plain discriminative towards a person of a different ethnicity. There are two sides to this argument consisting of two different points of view; Classical republicanism and natural rights. The classical republicanism stand point focuses on the common good, sacrificing individual liberties for the well being of the people. On the other hand, a person with the natural rights stand point believes that an individual's personal freedoms trump the safety of the community/country. I personally have a blended view where I believe personal freedoms are very important, but we must keep in mind the safety and security of American people.
In the past, America has been targeted by Middle Eastern countries, most notably September 11, 2001. The Al Qaeda terrorist group intentionally drove airplanes into prominent and important American buildings, costing many their lives and costing us many of our freedoms (classical republicanism at it's finest.) Because of this, people of Middle Eastern descent are often times assumed to be terrorists. While this does not apply to all Middle Eastern people, it does apply to many and because of this sort of 'racial profiling' we have been able to eliminate more terrorist attacks. This is where classical republicanism kicks in; We have to put aside our complaints and put up with being patted down in airport security, etc. in order to eliminate attacks.
Another example is the issue concerning illegal immigrants. States, such as Arizona, have tried to pass laws that allow police officers to stop people and ask to see documentation to prove that they are legal citizens of the U.S. Hispanics were mainly the target of this law. While it HAS helped us catch a lot of illegal immigrants, it doesn't necessarily apply to all Hispanic-looking people. Like racial profiling, classical republicanism works here as well because we are doing this to keep our citizens safe.
Probably the most talked about and the oldest issue is the 'white versus black' argument (though there really is no argument to be made because we're equal, but whatever...) Driving While Black, or DWB, has been one of the biggest results of racial profiling where a cop pulls over a black person while driving solely based on their skin color, believing they have done something wrong. Whites have been known to discriminate greatly against blacks since the Civil War and even before. I personally believe this is ridiculous. They have natural rights just like whites, or any other ethnicity does. Sure, there are black criminals, but there are also Asian, white, Hispanic, Indian, etc. criminals. The color of your skin doesn't define your character. Plus, it's not like blacks are known for attacking Americans in a terrorist-like manner. This discrimination isn't for the common good at all because there's really no threat.
Well followers, I've done enough rambling for one day (as usual.)
Live. Love. Blog.
-Dooley
