NYPD Cannot Profile

[HagiaSophia]

A Brooklyn Assemblyman says the NYPD is handcuffed by political correctness in the war on terrorism - and should profile subway passengers for bag searches.

“The individuals involved look basically like this,” Dov Hikind (D-Brooklyn) said yesterday, brandishing a printout of the FBI’s most wanted terrorists - all with Arabic names, most with facial hair, some wearing turbans.

“Why should a policeman have to think twice before examining people of a particular group?” Hikind asked. “They all look a certain way. It’s all very nice to be politically correct here, but we’re talking about terrorism.”

The NYPD’s random bag checks at subway stations are pointless if they force 75-year-old grandmothers to open their purses, but not people who fit the “terrorist profile,” he said.

But the NYPD says it isn’t in the profiling business - and doesn’t think singling out members of an ethnic group would work, anyway. “Racial profiling is illegal, of doubtful effectiveness, and against department policy,” the NYPD said in a statement.

nydailynews.com/news/local/story/333329p-284854c.html

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

Peace be with you!

I am inclined to agree with comedian Carlos Mancia on this one: “It’s just Achmed’s turn.” He explains how all different racial groups (including blacks, hispanics, Asians, Irish, ect.) have been racially profiled and discriminated against in the past. It happens. Then he said to put him in charge of airport security and he’d put up pictures of all the 9-11 hijackers so when “Achmed” complained “Why are you only checking me?” he could point to the pictures on the wall.
Police and other security personel cannot afford to be “politically correct” about things like this, especially now. Like Carlos Mancia said, there’s no Constitutional ammendment protecting “Achmed” from being offended.

In Christ,
Rand

 

[Snicker]

HagiaSophia:

A Brooklyn Assemblyman says the NYPD is handcuffed by political correctness in the war on terrorism - and should profile subway passengers for bag searches.

“The individuals involved look basically like this,” Dov Hikind (D-Brooklyn) said yesterday, brandishing a printout of the FBI’s most wanted terrorists - all with Arabic names, most with facial hair, some wearing turbans.

“Why should a policeman have to think twice before examining people of a particular group?” Hikind asked. “They all look a certain way. It’s all very nice to be politically correct here, but we’re talking about terrorism.”

The NYPD’s random bag checks at subway stations are pointless if they force 75-year-old grandmothers to open their purses, but not people who fit the “terrorist profile,” he said.

But the NYPD says it isn’t in the profiling business - and doesn’t think singling out members of an ethnic group would work, anyway. “Racial profiling is illegal, of doubtful effectiveness, and against department policy,” the NYPD said in a statement.

nydailynews.com/news/local/story/333329p-284854c.html

This is something that burns me up. While racial profiling may not be fair, it’s justified and needed. I can’t think of anything more stupid than strip searching an 80 year old white lady.

 

[Richardols]

HagiaSophia:

But the NYPD says it isn’t in the profiling business - and doesn’t think singling out members of an ethnic group would work, anyway. “Racial profiling is illegal, of doubtful effectiveness, and against department policy,” the NYPD said in a statement.

The New York City Police, by any standards, are NOT the Keystone Kops. If that very professional organization has concluded that racial profiling is ineffective, I’ll take their word for it.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I keep imagining an Arab in the midst of 1000 ultra-Orthodox Jews in Williamsburg, or with a 1000 student rabbis in the neighborhood of Yeshiva U., and the police can search only the Jews.

 

[Richardols]

Joe Kelley:

I keep imagining an Arab in the midst of 1000 ultra-Orthodox Jews in Williamsburg, or with a 1000 student rabbis in the neighborhood of Yeshiva U., and the police can search only the Jews.

No, not ONLY the Jews. Random stops and searches. To be sure, Williamsburg is full of Jews, but the cops would hardly choose to make stops there. Midtown Manhattan would be more like it.

 

[Servant1]

Richardols:

The New York City Police, by any standards, are NOT the Keystone Kops. If that very professional organization has concluded that racial profiling is ineffective, I’ll take their word for it.

That quotation is not evidence that the NYPD has decided that. It is evidence that the brass authorized to make that public statement is adhering exactly to the publicly politically correct line he was told to adhere to. It is evidence of nothing more.

I spent a number of years as a cop. Let me tell you that good police work, especially of the preventive nature, is ESSENTIALLY that of profiling. Profiling has become a dirty word not, but it is ESSENTIAL is parts of the policing function are to be effective. It is sheer reasoning. It is not racism.

Sure - it can be abused. So can many aspects of police work. So can many other things. As the Latin proverb tells us: ABVSVS NOT VSVM TOLLIT - the abuse does not take away the use.

 

[vern_humphrey]

A few years back a British couple were attacked in Florida. The wife, who survived the attack, told the police that the people who killed her husband were Black.

The Florida police were accused of “profiling” and “racism” because they didn’t question any White suspects in this crime.

 

[HagiaSophia]

Snicker:

This is something that burns me up. While racial profiling may not be fair, it’s justified and needed. I can’t think of anything more stupid than strip searching an 80 year old white lady.

The London police said today, they are using “profiling” to match up possible “stop and search” candidates.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Richardols:

No, not ONLY the Jews. Random stops and searches. To be sure, Williamsburg is full of Jews, but the cops would hardly choose to make stops there. Midtown Manhattan would be more like it.

Aha! Stopping people only in areas where they are likely to find those whose race fits the profile.

 

[mjdonnelly]

Servant1:

As the Latin proverb tells us: ABVSVS NOT VSVM TOLLIT - the abuse does not take away the use.

Anyone know how to say this above phrase? In latin please

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

This is rather stark, but it does make one wonder whether or not “racial profiling” is a euphemism for political correctness run amok.

HISTORY TEST

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by
   a. Superman
   b. Jay Leno
   c. Harry Potter
   d. a Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40
2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by
   a. Olga Corbett
   b. Sitting Bull
   c. Arnold Schwarzenegger
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by:
   a. Lost Norwegians
   b. Elvis
   c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
4. During the 1980’s a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
   a. John Dillinger
   b. The King of Sweden
   c. The Boy Scouts
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
   a. A pizza delivery boy
   b. Pee Wee Herman
   c. Geraldo Rivera
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year
   old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard
   in his wheelchair by:
   a. The Smurfs
   b. Davy Jones
   c. The Little Mermaid
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy
   diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
   a. Captain Kidd
   b. Charles Lindberg
   c. Mother Teresa
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
   a. Scooby Doo
   b. The Tooth Fairy
   c. Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
   a. Richard Simmons
   b. Grandma Moses
   c. Michael Jordan
   d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
    a. Mr. Rogers
    b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill’s women problems
    c. The World Wrestling Federation
    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were
    used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers
    and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon
    and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers.
    Thousands of people were killed by:
    a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
    b. The Supreme Court of Florida
    c. Mr. Bean
    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
    a. Enron
    b. The Lutheran Church
    c. The NFL
    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
    a. Bonnie and Clyde
    b. Captain Kangaroo
    c. Billy Graham
    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

BONUS QUESTION (no multiple choice):

Who set off the bombs in the London Underground?

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[HagiaSophia]

Middle Easterners should be targeted for searches on city subways, two elected officials said, contending that police have been wasting time with random checks in efforts to prevent terrorism in the transit system.

The city began examining passengers’ bags on subways and buses after the second bomb attack in London two weeks ago. Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg have said several times that officers will not engage in racial profiling.

But over the weekend, state Assemblyman Dov Hikind said police should be focusing on those who fit the “terrorist profile.”

“They all look a certain way,” said Hikind, a Democrat from Brooklyn. “It’s all very nice to be politically correct here, but we’re talking about terrorism.”

On Tuesday, Republican City Councilman James Oddo said the Sept. 11 World Trade Center attack by Middle Eastern men in hijacked airplanes prompted him to publicly declare his support for Hikind’s statements.

“The reality is that there is a group of people who want to kill us and destroy our way of life,” he said. “Young Arab fundamentalists are the individuals undertaking these acts of terror, and we should keep those facts prominently in our minds and eyes as we attempt to secure our populace.”

Oddo commended Hikind for “rushing headlong against the strong undertow of political correctness.”

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201625_pf.html

 

[grotto]

Dear Hunter - that was an excellent test, the multiple choices were laugh out loud and helped to take the sting out of the question!

“Profiling” is an adjective overused by the media - I think when words are overused to the point where they distort their meaning to suit those with an agenda they need to be retired.

People need to wake up, smell the coffee, we cannot afford foolish behavior in stopping terrorists - plain and simple!

If someone appears (which means: looks, acts, smells, dresses, walks, talks) to raise suspicion by those trusted to protect us from this harm, they must be confronted.
What! Does being confronted hurt? Big whoop! Somebody’s pride was hurt because they got asked to show they weren’t strapped with bombs in their backpack or under heavy clothing when its 90!

I’ve had it with such stupidity!! smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/1/1_4_31.gif

 

[Richardols]

Servant1:

That quotation is not evidence that the NYPD has decided that. It is evidence that the brass authorized to make that public statement is adhering exactly to the publicly politically correct line he was told to adhere to.

“the brass”? Of what? The “brass” of the NYPD. So it was the NYPD that decided that no racial profiling was to take place.

And, of course, you used racial profiling when you were a cop. Some people selected for that practice called one form of profiling “driving while black.”

 

[wabrams]

“the brass”? Of what? The “brass” of the NYPD. So it was the NYPD that decided that no racial profiling was to take place.

And, of course, you used racial profiling when you were a cop. Some people selected for that practice called one form of profiling “driving while black.”

Profiling for the sake of pulling over every black male you see just for the heck of it is illegal profiling. If a bank gets robbed, the suspects are white, male, & 15-20 yrs. of age, should everyone of every color be checked and questioned in that age range, or just teenage white males? If you say yes, then you believe in profiling.

 

[shockerfan]

“the brass”? Of what? The “brass” of the NYPD. So it was the NYPD that decided that no racial profiling was to take place.

And, of course, you used racial profiling when you were a cop. Some people selected for that practice called one form of profiling “driving while black.”

It appears that you are against profiling due to past abuses, and it has tainted your view of what should be an obvious response to a current problem.

I think you would agree that we have limited resources in which to fight terrorism. So how should we best direct the resources we do have? Well, it is a fact that Al Qaida has members trying to kill us. It is also a fact that in order to be a member of Al Qaida that you must be Muslim. It is also a fact that according to some of the latest census data that 0.4% of the US population identifies themselves as Muslim. Statistically speaking, does it make more sense to take a closer look at that group or spread your resources to do random searches that include the other 99.6% that Al Qaida would exclude from membership? Which group would have the highest probability of producing a terrorist?

I’m not talking about rounding people up and putting them in camps as was done to Japanese Americans in WW2. I am talking about looking into the backgrounds of those who fall into a very narrow category.

You won’t find leaders within the NYPD clammoring for profiling because they want to keep their jobs. Political correctness pervades all levels of government, and sadly, will end up costing lives.

If you disagree with what I have stated here, I would like you to address the statistics / probability argument that I have presented.

Peace.

 

[Richardols]

shockerfan:

It appears that you are against profiling due to past abuses, and it has tainted your view of what should be an obvious response to a current problem.

Once, it was routine for cops to beat confessions out of suspects. I was against those past abuses. Are you saying that my position has tainted my view of what might be a swell tactic to be used again to obtain confessions?

There are black Muslims, former Christians who have converted to Islam as well as the caricature big nose bearded Muslims wearing kuffiyehs. Are you going to include black men in your profile because some might be al Qai’dah or even white men as well?

I’m not talking about rounding people up and putting them in camps as was done to Japanese Americans in WW2. I am talking about looking into the backgrounds of those who fall into a very narrow category.

Yeah, right now, you’re not talking about it.

You won’t find leaders within the NYPD clammoring for profiling because they want to keep their jobs. Political correctness pervades all levels of government, and sadly, will end up costing lives.

This is factually demonstrable? Sorry, I “disagree with what [you] have stated here.” It sounds like prejudiced opinion to me, not statistically sound fact.

 

[shockerfan]

Richardols:

Once, it was routine for cops to beat confessions out of suspects. I was against those past abuses. Are you saying that my position has tainted my view of what might be a swell tactic to be used again to obtain confessions?

Routine? Do you have statistics to back that up? “Routine” implies that a majority of police did this? Is that your claim? (I know its not…I have read many of your posts, but you as a lawyer should choose your words more carefully

Richardols:

There are black Muslims, former Christians who have converted to Islam as well as the caricature big nose bearded Muslims wearing kuffiyehs. Are you going to include black men in your profile because some might be al Qai’dah or even white men as well?

If you read my post, I specifically mention “Muslim”. However, statistically speaking, the majority of Muslims are from the middle east and share a number of common visible traits.

Richardols:

Yeah, right now, you’re not talking about it.

Oh please…stick to the facts. Please present one statement I have ever made that justify your comment.

Richardols:

This is factually demonstrable? Sorry, I “disagree with what [you] have stated here.” It sounds like prejudiced opinion to me, not statistically sound fact.

I don’t have the stats to back that last statement up. It is an opinion formed from life experience, and what I read in the media. However, you did dodge my request that you address the statistics / probability argument I presented. Its simple math.

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

Richardols:

Once, it was routine for cops to beat confessions out of suspects. I was against those past abuses. Are you saying that my position has tainted my view of what might be a swell tactic to be used again to obtain confessions?

Peace be with you!

Are you referring to movies, or to a few isolated incidents in which the officers where charged with assault afterwards? I just watched a news special–either 60 Minutes or 48 Hours–where an officer was found guilty of beating up a man suspected in killing another police officer.
My friend’s dad is a police luitenant. He’s black, and he and his son (my friend) have both been the target of racial profiling before, even while he was a cop! Was this an abuse? Certainly. Does this officer still use profiling when they get a description of a black suspect, or a white suspect, or a hispanic suspect? Yes, that only makes sense.
There’s an area of town here that is predominately hispanic. Now say there’s a fight there, or a robbery, or whatever. The victim describes his attackers or robbers as being hispanic males around the age of 19 or 20. Why in the world would the police waste time questioning white or black or asian males and females between the ages of 40 and 70 just to be politically correct?
Or say that down the street my neighbor’s house is robbed. They describe the suspect as being a white male around 30 years of age with a long beard. Again, why would the police waste time questioning black or hispanic females around 10 years of age just to be politically correct? They wouldn’t. They would question those who fit the profile (ie, the description) of the suspect. And that is white males around the age of 30 with beards.

In Christ,
Rand