The Instigator
Weiler
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
SecularSociety
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Racial profiling is a legitimate police strategy.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
SecularSociety
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,654 times Debate No: 38246
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Weiler

Pro

Racial Profiling is a legitimate police strategy. If someone burns a cross on a black family's front lawn, I hope police aren't going to go out looking for a Persian guy.
SecularSociety

Con

Racial profiling is one of the least effective means of investigating a crime or case I have ever seen. There are just as many illegal white immigrants as there are hispanic or african american. If you stop a Hispanic person who is doing the speed limit on the road, because you think he may be illegal, you are wasting your time and there is just as likely a chance that the white male driving past you, as you talk to the Hispanic person, is illegal.

If you don't mind, could you make your point a little more clearly? What EXACTLY are you arguing for this case?
Debate Round No. 1
Weiler

Pro

It took me a moment to recover from the whopper you told there.

The Pew Research Institute says the 55-60% of all illegal immigrants in the US are from Mexico. Excluding all other Hispanic countries this already comprises the majority of our illegal immigrants.

I just wanted to address that though the topic here is not immigration.

Racial profiling is a legitimate tool in the same way any part of a profile is crucial. For instance, if you were looking for a serial killer in Washington DC, and you were checking all males between the ages of 25 and 45 (the probable age of a serial killer), you could save a lot of time if you knew that the majority of serial killers are white. Given the high African-American population of DC this would narrow down your list of suspects considerably.
SecularSociety

Con

If I wanted to commit a serious crime I would go somewhere that is highly populated by hispanics or african americans, and would almost instantly not be considered a suspect. This is going by your logic of course. For instance in Baltimore, Maryland more than 80% of all murder is done by the African American population there, and if I killed someone in that city I would more than likely get away with it due to racial profiling.

I apologize for assuming you meant immigration, but you also need to consider all the illegal Canadian immigrants that enter America every single day. Most of them are not documented into any statistical websites or papers, and therefore the 55-60 percent hispanic statistic you gave me is in actuality a fallacy.
Debate Round No. 2
Weiler

Pro

Mexican illegal immigrants, by definition, are not documented either, so your argument fails, and you cite no authority for an argument that people are pouring over the Canadian border.

My citing of the Pew Research center ads validity to my argument, the center was quoted in an article in the National Journal, which can be found at http://www.nationaljournal.com...

Your comment about going to Baltimore to commit a murder makes a valid point, however, this is not how most crime is committed. Most murders occur with a motive, not by someone simply wishing to kill somebody else.

In fact, since you chose Baltimore, which I live just a few miles from, it would interest you to know that Baltimore's gangs are not easily identifiable (see the Bureau of Justice Assistance article at https://www.ncjrs.gov...), and therefore, complete profiles, including the probable race of the unidentified subject, would be of even more value in a city like Baltimore.

I am for using a complete profile to locate suspects for any crime. Sometimes, but not always, these include the probable race of the suspect, and should be considered.
SecularSociety

Con

SecularSociety forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Weiler 3 years ago
Weiler
I am curious how Beverlee voted "tied" on sources, since my opponent used none.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by miketheman1200 3 years ago
miketheman1200
WeilerSecularSocietyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made a destructive point that racial profiling can be used to a criminals advantage. Conduct to pro for cons end ff
Vote Placed by Beverlee 3 years ago
Beverlee
WeilerSecularSocietyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: The Forfeiture was inconsiderate, so I gave a conduct point for that. I gave arguments to Con for saying that racial profiling could be used by criminals to easily hide from the police. If the police were to investigate crimes based on race, then they would be slow to catch criminals that do not commit the same crimes that other people in their race do. I thought this was true.