Let me drop a grenade in the room

bcc423 said:
Racism is racism. Racial profiling is racial profiling. Different things.

At its core, your statement is really about not having the balls to admit what you stand for without trying to re-define the unpopular terminology.

If you said "yep, it's racial profiling, but fuck, it gets the job done and doesn't affect me personally, so I'm all for it." (as others have done in this thread) -- then I would at least respect your position.
But trying to call it something else is lame.

Let me rephrase it for you a bit:
If you are trying to combat crime, then I don't think it's racist to target ethnic groups that make up the majority of offenders.

Sounds familiar?

It took decades to get over that one. With a bunch of people still supporting the idea of racial profiling for general law enforcement. (And only a few of them are actually admitting it. Most of the supporters are pussies like yourself, and try hard to give it a different name.)

In general, I think it stems from inability to imagine yourself in other people's shoes and the subsequent urge to justify that inability.
Click to expand...

I think that half the people in this thread think your a huge idiot. Your first post was the stupidest thing i've read in a few months, so please don't try to break down and interpret my inner message.

I never said it wasn't racial profiling you dumbfuck. In the Mass Media's (and Al Sharptons) eyes racial profiling is associated with racism.

My point was to point out that as long as racial profiling has statistics to back up it's implementation, then it's not racism.

Here's my dumbed down point of view for you:

If a Cop act's within his legal jurisdiction to make a stop, then I have no problem with him asking those of a Hispanic origin for identification.

So no, I'm not advocating cops harassing Hispanics left and right, but if they get pulled over for a broken taillight, then I see no problem investigating further due to their ethnicity.
 


Unarmed Gunman said:
Here (and in another post) it seems you've confused racist with prejudiced - there is a difference. Having preconceived notions about somebody based on their ethnicity, gender etc is prejudiced, not necessarily racist (or sexist, etc). Everybody is prejudiced because that is the way our brains process information. Racism is when you ignore information to the contrary of your prejudices and maintain solely negative opinions of someone based on their race. Big difference.

That being said, racial profiling is not racist. You're not assuming the Mexicans are less than human or worthless (ie. Jews in Nazi Germany, blacks during slavery, Rwandan conflict, etc) but you are assuming they are here illegally so it is prejudiced.

Prejudices are not necessarily a bad thing, since they help your brain to "roughly" process information quickly until you can gather more data to form a full opinion. Is it prejudiced to profile muslims at an airport - yes. Is it more effective than profiling 80 year old white women at the same rate? Of course.

As far as the Arizona Law, I only know what I've read about it which was just people's interpretation of it, so who knows how the law will be enforced. But if it gives cops the right to pull someone over because they suspect a person is an illegal, I would still have a problem with it. I'm sure it would be very effective in catching illegals in this country, but it's still a violation of a persons constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure in my opinion and it will probably be overturned by SCOTUS in the near future.
Click to expand...


WordNet Search - 3.0

Noun

S: (n) racist, racialist (a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others)
Adjective

S: (adj) racist (based on racial intolerance) "racist remarks"
S: (adj) racist, antiblack, anti-Semite (discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion)
WordNet home page
Click to expand...

A racist is just a person with a particular yet persistent prejudicial belief that indicates that they're race should have particular benifits because they beleive it to be seperate or superior over another. We've discussed this before it can be subtle or it can be blantant but it annoys me when people think just because they aren't wearing a swataka that that absolves them from any racist tendiences.

This law is racist in nature because it is descrimnatory on the basis of race. Again this is all subtle because the law doesn't (yet) say to go after mexicans, but it is completely implied that white people (europeans, russians..etc) won't be checked.
 
Trademark said:
Racial profiling:

"Racial profiling is the inclusion of racial or ethnichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicity characteristics in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime or an illegal act or to behave in a "predictable" manner."

.
Click to expand...

To separate out behaviors and assign them to categories of groups of people couldn't be more ridiculous. People are individuals, they may be shaped by their societies and cultures but they are still individuals and should be treated as such by the state. And I still maintain that racial profiling is inherently racist.
 
Turbolapp,

Let's lay out a hypothetical situation.

Lets say there are 30 million illegal immigrants in America and:

75% are Hispanic

25% are Other

It's your job to combat illegal immigration, you've been given a budget and your job's stability relies on your combating illegal immigration as effectively as possible.

Your jobs on the line, your seriously going to tell me that you're going to target every ethnicity equally to remain PC?
 
Begin Rant /

Am I the only guy left in the US that thinks we should let the immigrants in? Our country is 234 years old, thats 4 only generations. In that span of 4 generations everyone has forgotten that they were also immigrants at some point. Where the fuck does this sense of self entitlement come from now a days. Its sicking for people to think they have to right to live here and others do not just because their grandparents got in before these dumb ass laws and fences.

Do you really think that there is not enough land? is there really not enough jobs? If a immigrant with no education that can hardly speak english can do your job that should reflect poorly on you for being a dumb ass not on them taking jobs from decent americas. This is how its worked for the last 234 years why stop it now. Are all police mostly irish, are most bankers jewish, are irish not allowed to vote? People need to get off their high horses and take a look at just how long their family has lived here.

Also for you gub'net types, if you just make them citizens they will pay taxes. Where will your gripe be then?

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Click to expand...

/End Rant

Also yes its unjust and racist to stop everyone speaking spanish or looks spanish and ask them for their paperwork. Probable cause is bullshit. No one is going to fucking ask the Swedish guy, or the German guy, or even the Canadians to fork over their paperwork and you know it.
 
Unarmed Gunman said:
Here (and in another post) it seems you've confused racist with prejudiced - there is a difference. Having preconceived notions about somebody based on their ethnicity, gender etc is prejudiced, not necessarily racist (or sexist, etc). Everybody is prejudiced because that is the way our brains process information. Racism is when you ignore information to the contrary of your prejudices and maintain solely negative opinions of someone based on their race. Big difference.

That being said, racial profiling is not racist. You're not assuming the Mexicans are less than human or worthless (ie. Jews in Nazi Germany, blacks during slavery, Rwandan conflict, etc) but you are assuming they are here illegally so it is prejudiced.

Prejudices are not necessarily a bad thing, since they help your brain to "roughly" process information quickly until you can gather more data to form a full opinion. Is it prejudiced to profile muslims at an airport - yes. Is it more effective than profiling 80 year old white women at the same rate? Of course.

As far as the Arizona Law, I only know what I've read about it which was just people's interpretation of it, so who knows how the law will be enforced. But if it gives cops the right to pull someone over because they suspect a person is an illegal, I would still have a problem with it. I'm sure it would be very effective in catching illegals in this country, but it's still a violation of a persons constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure in my opinion and it will probably be overturned by SCOTUS in the near future.
Click to expand...


^^^^^THIS!
 
Racism - A illogical hatred of a person or group because of their nation of origin or color of their skin.

Racial Profiling - Statistical analysis showing that specific acts are more likely to committed by a person of a specific race or national origin. Numbers don't lie.


Am I the only guy left in the US that thinks we should let the immigrants in?
Click to expand...
Nope, I've got no problem with immigration...when it's done legally.

Also for you gub'net types, if you just make them citizens they will pay taxes. Where will your gripe be then?
Click to expand...
Taxes are evil.
 
BeerNuts said:
Begin Rant /

Am I the only guy left in the US that thinks we should let the immigrants in?
Click to expand...

We do let immigrants in, legally. But then they have to pay taxes and participate in society.

Illegal aliens pay no income tax, and they take money out of the country.

Additionally, people who support Human Rights should not support illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants are treated like shit by their employers and there's nothing they can do about it. They have the worst working conditions on earth.

People say they take jobs that Americans wouldn't take. It's partially true, but the reason those jobs are so bad is b/c Illegals are working them so there's nothing they can do about it. If there were no Illegals, businesses would have to raise wages/ working standards to attract people to work for them and the market would settle the issue of human rights for these types of jobs...
 
Im all for letting them in. Thats how this country was started. They just need to pay taxes and learn about birth control. I guess you can make them citizens. But really, whos gonna sign up for citizenship if they know they're gonna get taxed?

You can go ahead and take a mexicans job, but if you leveraged your DEBT into oblivion during the boom these past years, that job isn't going to help you much.

This isn't about race. Its about the MONIES, and people are desperate for it right now.
 
turbolapp said:
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=racistS: (n) racist, racialist (a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others)
Adjective
Click to expand...

You proved my point - The law is not racist because it has nothing to do with the claimed superiority or inferiority of a race. Arizona isn't saying the Mexicans shouldn't be allowed in the country because they are inferior, they're saying they should only be allowed to stay if they are legal immigrants, and reserve the right to enforce that law. How is that racist? Once again - you're confusing discrimination with racism. It is clearly discriminatory, but it is not racist.

I still disagree with randomly pulling over Mexicans to check their status, but that part will be overturned the 1st time an American files suit for violation of their 4th amendment rights.
 
I only draw the line when they start gassing people in concentration camps, or when they start ID'ing chinese, blacks and other minorities in America. Whichever comes first.
 
This is not Mexico. We do not have the same police culture.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's why it's not happening now. What I'm talking about is the change in mentality. Once it happens, a lot of things might change.

You are trying to tell me about how things are now, and I'm not arguing with it. I'm talking about the possible future.

Officers that work in an internal affairs capacity have a great love for busting cops. It is a fetish for them.
Click to expand...

That's not going to save the situation.

In societies where bribery is a daily occurrence, all the same principles you outlined still apply, yet the bribery continues.

BCC423 I would rather see 2 legal Americans with jobs than 3 illegals, or 4 or 5. The income might be the same but thats how I feel.
Click to expand...

Yep. That's an emotional response. And from an emotional point of view, it's completely valid.

Eventually employers will bite the bullet and figure out how to hire the people they need legally.
Click to expand...

That's like saying "eventually, the Americans will learn to live with slower economy and higher prices." Yes, they will, if forced. But the transition will be painful, and there is no guarantee that it will stick. It might ruin the lives of a couple generations only to get back to how things used to be later on. There are plenty of examples in the world history of such "reforms" going wrong and then reverting.
 
Liberties are for citizens, or for those who are legally becoming citizens. If you are not a citizen you do not have the same rights as a citizen has.
Click to expand...
How would you know if a person is a citizen before confirming that he/she is one?
Nobody says that illegal aliens should be exempt from the immigration laws.

But how do you define probable cause when applied to one specific person at a time?

It's the chicken and the egg problem. And you are the 5th person in this thread who seems to be failing to understand it.

You defend the position that illegal aliens should be dealt with. Well, shit, no one is arguing against it.

But you put a burden of proof on people who are not yet identified to have actually broken the (immigration) law, and you do it without probable cause.

That, and that alone is the core issue.

Immigration laws are still laws. And presumption of innocence applies to all laws.

Do you not get this?

It's exactly the same as searching all blacks for drugs because a lot of blacks sell drugs.

The difference between searching and asking for identification stems simply from the difference in the assumed offense.

Just as if blacks are presumed to be carrying drugs, they are searched for drugs.
And the Mexicans are presumed not to possess an ID, so they are asked to produce one.

Is it effective? Yes. But is it racial profiling? Absolutely.
 
So no, I'm not advocating cops harassing Hispanics left and right, but if they get pulled over for a broken taillight, then I see no problem investigating further due to their ethnicity.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly what I said. If cops check for ID in relation to other violations, then it's a fair game.

Did you miss that part, or were you not able to understand the words?
 
Exactly. This is why Mexico is making such a big deal out of it. They love that we take their poor citizens off their hands and they love the millions sent back home. It's a win-win for them. Just let America foot the fucking bill, they're invincible after all.
Click to expand...

What is it with you always trying to defend your position by showing that the others are doing something wrong?

Just because what you said about Mexico is true (which it is), doesn't invalidate the argument of racial profiling.

It's as if you tried to say "yes, we are assholes, but so are they" without actually saying the "yes, we are assholes" part.
 
Falian said:
Turbolapp,

Let's lay out a hypothetical situation.

Lets say there are 30 million illegal immigrants in America and:

75% are Hispanic

25% are Other

It's your job to combat illegal immigration, you've been given a budget and your job's stability relies on your combating illegal immigration as effectively as possible.

Your jobs on the line, your seriously going to tell me that you're going to target every ethnicity equally to remain PC?
Click to expand...


Um is someone holding a gun to my head? Cause I would never take that job.

The main problem I see with illegal immigration is not making them legal fast enough. These people come over here to find better jobs and a better life doing the jobs I sure as hell don't want to do. If they're going to work here then they sure as shit need to pay taxes. We do ourselves a ridiculous disservice by trying to fight them because they come over anyways, get paid under the table and then since they're not on the books, have no health insurance. How much money is the US losing because we're too politically afraid to embrace diversity? I say make them legal, and get them on the books, make them pay taxes and be done with it. Plus this would clear up so much bureaucratic crap so that in the rush to become legal the actual people we're wanting to screen for (you know the whole reason we need to secure the borders? "terrorists"? everyone remembers that's supposed to be your argument right? Not keeping out those damn mexicans...) would be much more apparent when trying to weed out the dangerous illegals.
 
Behold the wisdom of MSNBC:

2010-04-26-MSNBC-Brewer.jpg


"Law makes it a crime to be an illegal immigrant."

Of course they were/are spinning it to be an oh-so-mean law that's soooo unfair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom