Why Arizona Should “Racially Profile”
When the Times Square bombing suspect was first reported to be a “white male,” I shook my head. I knew that, despite Mayor Bloomberg’s asinine musings about how the perpetrator was probably “homegrown” and perhaps someone upset about the healthcare bill, this was nonsense. “It’s about as likely as a story about Bill Clinton becoming a monk,” I thought.
Of course, this was no great insight. Given that 99 percent of the terrorists bedeviling us today are non-white Muslims, it was just common sense — otherwise known as profiling.
The critics of Arizona’s new immigration law complain that it will lead to “racial profiling.” In response, the law’s defenders point out that the legislation specifically forbids the practice.
Both groups are wrong.
They accept two false suppositions. The first is that the practice in question is immoral.
The second is that “racial profiling” actually exists.
Harold
Why not ask everybody that they stop to provide ID? White, black, yellow, brown or purple. Everyone.
I agree. I really don’t understand the lack of comprehension on this one and the continual desire to be politically correct. If there are a high percentage of persons of Mexican decent illegally crossing the border into Arizona, it almost seems obvious to me that you would categorize each person as being Mexican. This would also be true in the case of our most recent attempts at detonating bombs in cars or airplanes. If the persons involved are of Middle Eastern decent, in the majority of cases, I again, would have to categorize them as being of Middle Eastern. This is in no way a racial slur, or a case of profiling, it is a matter of statistics.