According to a study by Lamberth Consulting on the United States Customs Service’s practices, when agents of the Customs stopped by means of racial profiling to target prospective smugglers and started on focusing on race-neutral aspects such as behaviour, they amplified their rate of productive searches over 300 percent (Amnesty International USA, n. d. ).
Statistics have confirmed that employing racial profiling to sanction highway-bound drug messengers is not just erroneous, but futile. In 1999, an assessment by the Department of Justice disclosed that while officers unreasonably focused on Latino and African-American drivers, they discover drugs more frequently when they searched whites than when they rummaged around African-American; that is 17percent for White as compared to 8 percent for Blacks (Amnesty International USA, n. d. ).
A comparable study in New Jersey establish that even though people of colour were searched more often, State troopers recovered drugs 25 percent of the time in vehicles driven by Whites, 5 percent by Latinos, and 13 percent by African-Americans (Amnesty International USA, n. d. ) Racial Profiling Undermines National Unity and Encourages Hate According to the numerous human rights and civil rights organizers, the spreading out of racial profiling after the attacks in September 11th in the United States appears to have contributed to an environment of discrimination.
Such climate of prejudice eventually encourages hate crimes against particular minority groups and persons who look in a similar way to them by suggesting the message that such discrimination is tolerable and useful in combating terrorism. Concurrently, Muslim and Arab-American community leaders assert that racial profiling approaches such as the INS’s and Department of Justice Special Registration programs have significantly reduced their community members’ want to support with anti-terrorism endeavours.
Comparable outcomes have been noted in Latino and African-American communities besieged by racial profiling police approaches. Despite the fact that a number of police officers serve their communities in an ethical and professional approach, the debate over the certainty of the practice of racial profiling in the law enforcement is most deafening on the part of its existence on a national plane. Indeed, 60 percent of Americans surveyed in 1999 believe that racial profiling exists in the country (Leach, n. d. , p. 1). Ethical Reasons Against Racial Profiling
There is several misunderstanding surrounding the Ethical Principle that administers Racial Profiling. To exclusively target ethnic group members for suspicion of certain transgressions is not ethically tolerable. The explanation for this is that a group’s behaviour or person’s behaviour is not automatically suggestive of the accepted behaviour of other members of the similar group. Racial profiling creates the dilemma of certain innocent and loyal residents and citizens being subjected to a possibly humiliating experience.
It is important that law enforcers are well educated to restructure the aforesaid effect through sensitive management of all individuals with added measure of human dignity. Racial profiling places an increased load directly on the shoulders of one group of population. Just because an individual, for instance is Black, he will put up with the impact of speeding enforcement measures while Whites are more expected to speed unreservedly.
As a rule minorities are hard workers who perpetrate no crimes; however they will be placed to an unequal amount of enforcement action and provisional seizure of themselves although their moral and physical demeanour is identical to those Whites. To reinstate public confidence and improve the relationships of the police and community, law enforcement agencies must deal with both the apprehensions of community in general that are significant to discriminatory policing and the accusations of racial profiling made by average citizens.