Racial Profiling at Airports
Political leaders need to be convinced that practices involving racial profiling at airports and highways are harmful not only to the particular individuals but to the whole nation. Racial profiling is not only “racially insensitive” or “politically wrong” but also ill conceived, destructive and has over time proved an ineffective method of curbing criminology. In determining the wrong aspects of racial profiling, leaders need to a ascertain what racial profiling does and what it is not do relative to the law enforcement systems of the country. In accordance to the Fourteenth Amendment, the government or state should not deny any individual, irrespective of race or status the right to equal protection. Racial profiling is typically based on the framework of unequal protection. In these systems, blacks, Arabs and Latinos are likely to be searched by law enforcement officers and therefore, receive lesser dignity than their white counterparts. This aspect does not go in line with the equal rights provision of the Fourteenth amendment.
However, supporters of racial profiling have been arguing that this aspect does not show racial prejudice or favoritism. According to them, minority groups such as Arabs, Africans, Latinos and so on have been prominent in terrorism activities and other crimes in comparison to their white counterparts. They continue to pose that, security personnel at airports and highways have good reasons as to why they are doing so. A man who looks an Arab going towards an airplane would be likely to be a terrorist. Therefore, police have to search him. Such kind of likelihood is termed as infinitesimal. The logic behind the supporters of racial profiling is that law enforcement officers ought to pay more attention to minority group of people such as Arabs, Blacks and Latinos than to whites because they have more terrorism tendencies.