CreateDebate


Debate Info

36
33
I am for it. I am against it.
Debate Score:69
Arguments:52
Total Votes:71
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 I am for it. (27)
 
 I am against it. (25)

Debate Creator

Devamazing(8) pic



How do you stand on racial profiling?

With more and more terroristic activities in the last few years, the government has proposed racial profiling as a way to help prevent terrorists from attacking our country. how do you stand on this issue.

I am for it.

Side Score: 36
VS.

I am against it.

Side Score: 33

Political correctness is killing this country. If the majority of terrorist are young, middle eastern men, then don't waste your time checking little old ladies, spend your time checking young, middle eastern men. If they don't like it, then tell them to help seek out and turn in the terrorists. Same for illegals. If the civilian population does not like these individuals, then make them responsible for turning them in. ;)

Side: I am for it.
Mahollinder(898) Disputed
5 points

Political correctness is killing this country.

You're right. I'm not sure how. But you're right. I was being sarcastic, by the way

If the majority of terrorist are young, middle eastern men, then don't waste your time checking little old ladies, spend your time checking young, middle eastern men.

Then we should actually ignore Arabs and Persians in America, because white (often Christian) men have committed the most domestic terrorism in the country.

If they don't like it, then tell them to help seek out and turn in the terrorists

What a day when the tables will turn!

If they don't like it, then tell them to help seek out and turn in the terrorists. Same for illegals. If the civilian population does not like these individuals, then make them responsible for turning them in.

People in power are always willing to infringe on the rights of the minority, and to oblige themselves less hospitality to "others" in the name of necessity, as long as what is necessary is not done to them.

Side: I am against it.

People in power are always willing to infringe on the rights of the minority, and to oblige themselves less hospitality to "others" in the name of necessity, as long as what is necessary is not done to them.

OK, so NOW you are against the government profiling the rich and raising their taxes.... or are you only for profiling when it suits YOUR purpose ;)

Side: I am for it.
TERMINATOR(6779) Disputed
1 point

You are trying to dispute Joe - JOE - with a rational argument !

Then we should actually ignore Arabs and Persians in America, because white (often Christian) men have committed the most domestic terrorism in the country.

Sources!

What a day when the tables will turn!

Let's make it illegal to be an unregistered terrorist. Sure to be a great success.

People in power are always willing to infringe on the rights of the minority

Then why is political correctness the exact opposite? Help the minorities, forget about the majority.

Side: I am for it.
aveskde(1935) Disputed
1 point

Then we should actually ignore Arabs and Persians in America, because white (often Christian) men have committed the most domestic terrorism in the country.

So white anglo-saxons have suicide bombed recently? We're talking current events by the way.

People in power are always willing to infringe on the rights of the minority, and to oblige themselves less hospitality to "others" in the name of necessity, as long as what is necessary is not done to them.

That doesn't really answer the statement. It is frequently the case that moderate Muslim populations stay passive towards terrorists, are silent, or actually aid them. It is a reasonable suggestion that we use their assistance in finding these terrorists.

Side: I am for it.
1 point

Political correctness says that it is more important to be nice than to state the truth. We will not be able to confront our true problems unless we are honest about them.

Political correctness requires us to pretend that all cultures are equal. It is bad to pretend that all cultures are equal. When we pretend that all cultures are equal, we let people that want to kill us into our country. When we let people that want to kill us into our country they commit acts of terrorism. When people commit acts of terrorism against us we go to war, and kill millions of people. This whole process could have been stopped if we would have had some tough love at the beginning and only let people into our country that loved liberty, respects the rights of women, gays, minorities, pluralism, etc.

Political correctness does not allow people to say what is on their mind openly. When people can't complain in the open and speak the ugly truth, the freaks will take the ugly truth to an unhealthy extreme, and cause more problems than if you would have let them speak openly. This happens in Europe when large political parties are so politically correct, that people are driven to extremest parties.

Side: I am for it.

Yeah! Screw political correctness crap ;)

Side: I am for it.
2 points

Racial profiling is just a way to describe a suspect or convicted person. The clothes they wear, how much they weigh and their height also get described. It tells the truth because it's accurate.

Side: I am for it.
2 points

lets be real. when i walk in to a party in Oakland and their are no white people............. i re think my situation and i most likely leave just to be safe, yeah its a Lil racist but my ass is safe. same if a brother goes into a house and there is a bunch of crackers, countreeee music and you hear a yeeee haaa or tooo that fella is gonna get his ass out of there quick cus he doesn't wanna be a hate crime victim.

yeah stereotypes are wrong and profiling a person is Wong but it can safe you ass and we all do it every day!!!!!!!!!!!! cops,airport personnel whatever all do it and it saves lives and it should be done, but only in a respectable manner.

Side: I am for it.
2 points

It depends upon the context. If we're talking about general crime, then racial profiling is the wrong criteria to use as a heuristic for trouble makers. Instead we should look at signs of drug use and poverty.

If we're dealing, on the other hand, with terrorism from a force that is entirely one ethnic group, or a majority of an ethnic group, it would be a reasonable heuristic to use but only under specific circumstances requiring such drastic measures.

Side: I am for it.

This is a response to about 4 arguments on the other side.

Joe is right, I doubt profiling is done solely by race anywhere. Profiling is about how you look, how you walk, how you dress, and what you do. This is how criminals are caught. You create a "Profile" of the criminal, and then you seek out people who fit that profile. It's very unfortunate that a few people are making problems for other people, but as was said before, all the more reason to have everyone help to turn these people in.

Also, just a side note, where is your "right" not to be profiled against? 14th amendment says you cannot be discriminated against due to race, but is being questioned, even for a crime "discrimination"? Don't throw the world "right" around so easily, we actually have very few "rights" and this word is very commonly abused.

Finally, racial profiling is illegal everywhere I know of. The Arizona law SPECIFICALLY says people cannot be questioned based on their race.

Side: I am for it.
1 point

Racial profiling is in general pretty accurate.

I'm not talking in a purely 'crime' term. I pretty much mean in everything.

Actually I think the word is generalisation.

Blacks are more likely to be blue collar criminals.

Whites are more likely to be white collar criminals.

Asians are not likely to be criminals.

Pretty accurate amirite?

Side: I am for it.
1 point

I am half white and half something else, and If i was reading this post my Mind would helplessly wonder what the other else is. already bagged. As that Lady :) said, inferiority starts in the self or smth like that. I tend to agree with that in certain ways, so until I realize that i wont be able to act it. So far so good, is the profiler's problem. But the problem is not solved. If the colour of my skin was something else, i would be a different person. Maybe it would turn out for the better, maybe the racial profiling would push me to be more demanding of myself, or maybe it would turn out for the worse. I would use it as a reason to not care about the society and to hell with karma, i would blame it on the devil, Uncle Sam. Or maybe I would be the same as now, who knows. Maybe is a blessing in disguise, it helps out the profilees not waste time with the bigots. I don't know if its the right comparison but i would put it this way. Just like everybody's gay, everybody's a little racial profiler. And I'm kinda adopting the liberal stance on sexual orientation :D

(i tried to tag it why not but it didnt let me )

Side: I am for it.
1 point

In our modern world, racial profiling is a morally reprehensible ideal. In America, it would seem that a policy of racial profiling would go against the ideology that our country was founded on. Ideologically if all men are created equal, shouldn't all men (and women) go through the same screening when they board a plane? Ideologically, yes, but the America we live in is a real country, with real problems. Whatever their intentions, the founding fathers merely laid the groundwork of our country, and had no way of foreseeing the future we now find ourselves in. That being said (or written), the founding fathers are still the founding fathers, and their ideas cannot be ignored. Thus, it is acceptable to profile based on past experience, but it is unacceptable (not to mention downright dumb, and ineffective) to assume that all members of a certain ethnicity or with a certain background are guilty, just as it is to assume that all members of another ethnicity or background are innocent. So, when it comes to racial profiling, our national policies must be based in a gray area somewhere between the ideals of the founding fathers and what recent experience has shown us.

Side: I am for it.
1 point

If we had only gave visas to those who were well adapted to pluralistic societies we would have prevented thousands of deaths that resulted from September 11th and then from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq

Mohamed Atta's was the leader of the hijackers that flew the plane into the world trade center. His roomates in Germany said his personality was "complete, almost aggressive insularity" (Perfect Soldiers, by Terry McDermott, p.25).

If we had tried to ensure that only those who were well adapted to pluralistic societies were given travel visas, we would have prevented Mohamed Atta from perpetuating the September 11th attacks. If we had prevented September 11th, we could have prevented the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan. That is thousands if not millions of lives, trillions of dollars, all because we didn't want to be mean... we kill innocent people because we don't want to be mean... but we have no problem dropping bombs from drones, in wars that could have been prevented if we had just used tough love and said no to visas to anti-social psychopaths.

This has been somewhat simplified, but the argument also applies well to all the September 11th hijackers: they were not well adapted to Western cultures. They did not have any non extremest friends. The could not hold down regular jobs that required getting to know, or trust those that they worked with.

Side: I am for it.
1 point

We should profile young men from Muslim countries more often than old women from Wisconsin. Maybe not much more. But if their are 100 young men from Muslim countries and 100 old women from Wisconsin, I want at least 1 more young Muslim to get profiled than old women. Before we start talking numbers, lets all agree that there should atleast be one more young man from Syria taken out of the line, than old Women from Wisconsin.

Side: I am for it.

I'm against it. It would be effective, but it's a violation of rights that simply cannot be tolerated.

I am however, in favor of religious profiling, although I realize such a thing is also considered by most people to be a violation of rights.

The difference to me, is that religious affiliation is a choice, a person's race obviously is not.

Side: I am against it.
1 point

This is a good point I was going to bring up, about religious profiling. The only major flaw I see however is that religion is easily hidden, especially by fanatics who know how to infiltrate the system.

Side: I am against it.
2 points

With more and more terroristic activities in the last few years, the government has proposed racial profiling as a way to help prevent terrorists from attacking our country. how do you stand on this issue.

I am wholly against it. Terrorists come in all shapes and sizes, picking one race won't help stop terrorism as a whole. The terrorists will just train terrorists of a different race, something they do already.

Side: I am against it.
1 point

because, you know, racial profiling has never created any resentment

/sarcasm

contrary to popular belief, not all middle eastern men are terrorist, and not all Latinos are illegals.

shocking isn't it?

all racial profiling eventually does is cause racism to breed

edit for bad grammar

Side: I am against it.
1 point

It's racism, and I had assumed intelligent people had moved beyond racism.

Side: I am against it.
1 point

Not on race, but by country of origin. We should profile those who fly by nation of origin. Liberals say they are pro-science, but they don't believe in applying simple statistics. They don't want to do things that would save lives, because feelings are more important to them than facts. You could spend 1/2 an hour to develop an algorithm assigns more inspections to people from countries based on the nation of origin of successful terrorist attacks. Perhaps you could only look back one year, so if you country does better, then fliers are rewarded very quickly. If you are profiled you should be mad at people from your country that ruin it for the wrest of you, and not mad at the world for reacting to the actions from people of your country.

Side: I am against it.

Arizona has gotten into hot water with the Obama Administration in reference to racial profiling.

Side: I am against it.
0 points

Racial Profiling is immoral, and discriminative. what are they going to do next, break into darker-light-skined people's homes, and decide to arrest them, convict them, sentence them to death, and then find out that there an American citizen, went to there home country to see relatives, came back an deprived of his rights, and then killed? The second we as Americans decide to discriminate people because of there skin color, is the time that the America I came to love is dead. I would never view her the same way. I as an African-American, who has been discriminated against. It's bad enough that we judge them now, but making a law that makes it OKAY to Persecute people on beliefs and color is just so wrong.

Side: I am against it.
TERMINATOR(6779) Disputed
3 points

Racial Profiling is immoral,

How so? What is morality?

and discriminative.

Well, duh!

what are they going to do next, break into darker-light-skined people's homes, and decide to arrest them, convict them, sentence them to death, and then find out that there an American citizen, went to there home country to see relatives, came back an deprived of his rights, and then killed?

Slippery slope. However, as is quite obvious, people don't mind if it serves their purpose.

The second we as Americans decide to discriminate people because of there skin color, is the time that the America I came to love is dead.

What does your love life matter to us? Why must you love a country?

I would never view her the same way.

Too late. Discrimination is rampant.

I as an African-American, who has been discriminated against.

As have most other people - white, Asian, African, native, Jewish, ec.

It's bad enough that we judge them now, but making a law that makes it OKAY to Persecute people on beliefs and color is just so wrong.

Again, what is morality?

Side: I am for it.

If you don't want to be profiled, then don't speak ebonics, don't dress like the brothers and try to fit in. Do you think Michael Jordan, Bill Cosby and Tiger Woods are profiled as your typical N word? ;)

Side: I am for it.
zombee(1026) Disputed
1 point

It is simply naive to think that only minorities who fit their respective stereotypes are the victims of racial profiling.

Side: I am against it.