(2009.Nov.06 02:21 PM)guiniyeyo Wrote: i have a quick question for those of you that are saying profiling a discrimination and such is wrong. im not arguing that it is just a quick question.
eff, not calling you out just rember your posts in particular lets say you own a buisness doesnt matter what kind. two gentlemen come in to apply for an open position. one of the gentlemen is very qualifed for the position if not over qualified but happens to be a convicted felon. the second gentlemen is considerably less qulified then the first and perhaps even under qualified for the position. which one do you hire?
now giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming your a good hearted person youll hire the felon. however 99% of ppl dont think like that and there immediate response would be what kind of conviction. people prfile felons based on there charges and assume if you screwed up once youll do it again. now that is often not the case however this thought process and discrimniation of ppl trying to get there lives back on track is often times supported by state laws.
how is saying you know 5% of felons screw up again so im not gonna gove you a chance different then saying 5% of muslims are extermists so i dont want to give any of them a chance
i guess the point im trying to make is yea profiling is cool when its talking about specific races or sexes but when its something like being a thief or violent its totally cool
Discrimination is a form of rejection based on a class or category. You can discriminate because of race, sex, religion, age, sexual orientation, economical status, handicaps, the list is endless.
Racial profiling is the inclusion of race in the likelihood that a person will commit a crime. It is used (or was used, and still is used but not as publicly) by law enforcement personnel. As such, it casts a net over an entire race as more likely to engage in crime and creates a set of "second class citizens" (which goes against Amendment 14 since we're talking about the US - other countries have similar legal texts).
Being a convicted felon is a choice (in an overwhelming number of cases), race is something you're born with and can't change (spare me the Jackson drama).
You say 5% of felons are recidivists...
Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime. (Dept. of Justice)
Not 5%. 68%.
Are you saying 68% of Arabs are :
A - Muslim? (not all Arabs are Muslim)
B - Extremists? (not all Muslims have the same interpretation of the Qur'an)
C - Terrorists? (not all extremists are violent)
D - All of the above?
Do you see where this slope leads? Remember the Japanese American internment camps? Cause this is where this conversation is headed.
And even at 68% - I'd hire the ex-felon if the law allows it and he's more qualified. I'd hire him if he's Muslim, too. Even if it's a she in a wheelchair. I want the best candidate - not the one who resembles me the most.
for the record, profiling isn't discrimination... affirmative action and title IX both are.
