Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I often wonder if truly legit people care...it seems to only be the shady people and or people with a shady past that complain about it.
Aren't we taught to profile and generalize right out of the womb?
I often wonder if truly legit people care...it seems to only be the shady people and or people with a shady past that complain about it.
Aren't we taught to profile and generalize right out of the womb?
Give us some context. Are you talking about race or people with guns at a bank? Both could be considered profiling but significant differences exist between the two. Assuming someone is a certain way because they are black makes you a ****ty human being. It's unfair to judge someone without knowing enough about them. A guy with a gun at a bank is a little different. While he could be one of those second amendment guys who likes to make a point about his small penis, he also has a gun in a bank which traditionally has never been a good sign. That and I'd imagine most banks would request you not bring firearms into the building, and certainly not open carry at the very least.
I guess the bottom line is what sort of generalization you're doing. If a guy walks into a job interview clearly messy and unprepared, you can assume he needs to get some things in order first. If you just notice he's black and decide not to hire him for that, then you should be ashamed of yourself and call your parents to let them know they failed in raising a decent human being.
Here in Portland, we supposedly lead the nation in underage sex slavery/trade. So recently the police decided to run stings intended to take the pimps out and into jail. Well, Portland is 5% black and the pimps it turned out were 95% black. So once the arrests started the left and I think the ACLU stepped in and stated that so long as more then 5% blacks were being arrested, it was racial profiling and they intended to sue to make it stop. The city consulted with attorneys and decided they had no choice but to end the stings and allow the underage sex slave trade to continue.
This is what I think about when we talk of profiling. And I think it's nothing but PC crap.
Here in Portland, we supposedly lead the nation in underage sex slavery/trade. So recently the police decided to run stings intended to take the pimps out and into jail. Well, Portland is 5% black and the pimps it turned out were 95% black. So once the arrests started the left and I think the ACLU stepped in and stated that so long as more then 5% blacks were being arrested, it was racial profiling and they intended to sue to make it stop. The city consulted with attorneys and decided they had no choice but to end the stings and allow the underage sex slave trade to continue.
This is what I think about when we talk of profiling. And I think it's nothing but PC crap.
Ok, but that's not profiling, nor would it be an argument to favor it.
If you set up a sting operation and find evidence of someone partaking in sex trafficking, then you've gotten probably cause and can make a move. Profiling would be to stop every black person you see and do a thorough search of their lives to see if they're sex traffickers.
Give us some context. Are you talking about race or people with guns at a bank? Both could be considered profiling but significant differences exist between the two. Assuming someone is a certain way because they are black makes you a ****ty human being. It's unfair to judge someone without knowing enough about them. A guy with a gun at a bank is a little different. While he could be one of those second amendment guys who likes to make a point about his small penis, he also has a gun in a bank which traditionally has never been a good sign. That and I'd imagine most banks would request you not bring firearms into the building, and certainly not open carry at the very least.
I guess the bottom line is what sort of generalization you're doing. If a guy walks into a job interview clearly messy and unprepared, you can assume he needs to get some things in order first. If you just notice he's black and decide not to hire him for that, then you should be ashamed of yourself and call your parents to let them know they failed in raising a decent human being.
Are you saying we should selectively profile and generalize?
And use extreme caution when color and minorities are involved out of fear of being considered racist?
Is that real world realistic?
I often wonder if truly legit people care...it seems to only be the shady people and or people with a shady past that complain about it.
Aren't we taught to profile and generalize right out of the womb?
It just seems far more ignorant not to generalize than it does to.
I know one thing for sure; if I were a thug, a criminal or a meth-head I'd hate generalizations and profiling.
I just don't believe anybody stand-up gives a _ _ _ _ and most of us encourage it.
I know I've never suggested to my college daughter that she stop to get gas in a rough part of town where people with gold teeth and low-riders loiter. I know, I'm such a bigot....they're probably all great people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
