| Customer service at BYU-I can leave students feeling left out |
by Ashley Rappleyea
STA02006@BYUI.EDU
Photo Editor
|
It is valid to be concerned about your safety and that of those around you when suspicious characters are around, but to base your suspicions solely on race, color, ethnicity or national origin is wrong.
America stands for equality and fairness for all. We do our best in forming laws, listening to the voice of the people, ensuring a democracy by electing competent and honest people in our legislative system. Although mistakes do happen and the natural man does run through all our veins, this is the ideal our forefathers created and the ideal our friends, relatives and ourselves have fought to preserve.
Why then do we assume those of a different color, ethnic background or national origin are of a suspicious character? And why do we still assume those who are addicted to artificial tanning are still white? We haven’t recognized “orange” as another race? Maybe we should, since Orange people have different lifestyles.
“Profiling based on any characteristic is a time-tested and universal police tool, and that excluding race as a factor makes no sense,” according to Wikipedia.org, a free online encyclopedia.
Whether it’s assuming a white kid in a black neighborhood is up to no good or the opposite situation, people make assumptions about others with the idea of protecting themselves or others.
Law enforcement officers profile people to protect others. Sometimes this goes too far and becomes racial or ethnic discrimination. When can you say it has gone too far?
Too far is when race or ethnic background is the only factor in suspect profiling. Race or ethnic background can, but is not required, to be one of several factors in suspect profiling in law enforcement.
The End Racial Profiling Act of 2004 was introduced in the House and the Senate in February 2004. The act “attacks the insidious practice of racial profiling by law enforcement officers” and “takes concrete steps to put an end to the insidious practice of racial profiling at all levels,” according to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, or NAACP, in a letter to concerned parties on March 4, 2004.
When officers see traffic violations, they also look for subsequent violations when the vehicle is pulled over.
For example, if a car is swerving in and out of lanes, it may be pulled over for improper lane travel. Once the vehicle is pulled over, an officer may look for things like bloodshot eyes, slurring of speech, dilated pupils, the smell of alcohol or evidence of other influential substances. It is their job to stop illegal action, to protect life, liberty and property.
Officers are sworn to serve and protect. They are trained not to victimize individuals or groups, but to recognize and be aware of suspicious people.
Some may argue that everyone is different, and just because someone’s last name is “Manson” should not imply that they are like creepy rock star Marilyn Manson or murderer Charles. Skin color or ethnic background should not be an inference of guilt, either.
Homeland Security took special notice of those who fit, not the criteria, but correlational features of the terrorists who took part in the September 11 tragedy. Was it wrong for them to do so in their efforts to protect families, friends and American citizens? Probably not, but it is wrong for citizens to take matters into their own hands and discriminate against others.
We have made mistakes in the past, like rounding up Japanese-Americans after the bombing of Pearl Harbor and throwing Arab passengers off planes just because they are Islamic. But is it valid for public safety officers and school administration to be wary of white students at your child’s school who wear dark trenchcoats and engage in antisocial behavior? Yes. What if those students are minorities, is it valid then? Yes, but that would be profiling now, wouldn’t it?
HELPFUL LINKS
