I think I finally figured out what has been bugging me about all this hollering about “racial profiling.”
Let’s set aside the fact that the term as used has nothing at all to do with the way profiling works. What they mean by the term is that white people make the assumption that any black person should be assumed to be a thug until proven otherwise. IOW, making judgments about how he should be treated based solely on complexion.
Yet liberals have for 50 years now been insisting that we racially profile (in their sense of the term) all black people in a positive way (again, positive by their definition). Since blacks as a group are more often poor than whites, we must give all blacks extra points (affirmative action) in areas that might help them get out of poverty.
Yet we are at the same time supposed to ignore the much higher crime rate of blacks, and not make judgments about individual black men on their group’s average criminality.
Yet the white/black poverty rate disparity (2.7x) is much less dramatic than the black/white crime rate disparity (7x for murder).
By any logical standard, if we are supposed to make judgments about how to treat individuals members of a group based on their average income, we should do the same with regard to their crime rate.
So as far as I’m concerned their race cards just expired. Be an individual and be judged as such in all ways, or be a member of your group, and be willing to be judged as such in all ways.
Pick one.
Now, cities across the country are forbidding employers, both public and private from inquiring about criminal records in before hiring interviews.