The quota advocates believe that Racial Profiling (race reporting) is OK as long as it benefits persons of color! But look out if racial profiling results in "negative impact" on anyone besides whites and Asians!
July 15, 2002: Special report on reverse discrimination at the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA)
Racial profiling is performed thousands of times every day by employers and government agencies who require job applicants to list their "race" or "ethnicity" on employment and contracting applications. Thus employers can hire the right number of the right colors, according to federal law. This is defined as "good" racial profiling.
"Bad" racial profiling occurs when a minority is stopped or arrested by police. The guilt of the individual doesn't seem to figure into the accusation of "bad" racial profiling.
The NAACP's explanation for the apparently higher crime rates among blacks is quite simple: The evil white police (even black police officers are defined this way) simply enforce the law more harshly on minorities.
Normally in our system of justice, the burden of proof falls upon the accuser. But this is not the case with charges of racial profiling. The racial lobby is not required to prove that black motorists don't commit more traffic infractions than others. Instead, the accused (the police departments) are required to prove that they don't enforce the law more harshly against minorities.
We are thus evolving a system of "racial proportionality" in law enforcement. Rank and file police officers now have a strong incentive to look the other way when minorities might be involved in criminal activity.
Factoid: Certain federal death penalty cases must be reviewed by the U.S. Department of Justice to ensure racial balance on death row.
Click the Menu choices at the left to browse our collection of "Racial Profiling" case studies.