Police Profiling is a good thing.

There is a big difference between the example I presented and the one that you present, namely that mine actually happened whereas yours is made up. You need to actually provide the evidence that this is true for it to be valid or an argument. Besides that, I'll answer the question the scenario brings up. I wouldn't racially profile and target white people for more traffic stops and searches, or whatever race is shown in the study. Instead, I would increase the number of officers and work to actually solve the crimes that were committed. There is no evidence that your method would have any effect at all. Even if I granted that the study was valid and true, there is still no reason to believe that you would actually be able to solve any more crimes. Perhaps if the officers were to illegally search individuals who fit the category the study says commit more crimes it would do something. Even then, you wont catch more than illegal substances people had on their person, which hardly deals with the more harmful crimes committed in society, such as assaults, robberies, and other violent crimes. You can't prevent them by profiling people. Pro says "I would like to remind you that police profiling and how police treat suspects are two different things. A case of harassment, or abuse by a police officer based on race is racism, and has nothing to do with police profiling, which is simply a way of more efficiently deciding who may or may not be a criminal, so all arguments stating that this is an issue are pointless, considering they haven't been linked to the resolution." 1. I provided a very clear link into the resolution in my last speech. "The American Heritage dictionary defines racism as "Discrimination or prejudice based on race." That is PRECISELY what the police profiling is." You yourself say that the profiling is based on the race of the individual. Furthermore, the word demographics in the resolution means(American heritage dictionary) "a portion of a population" which would include different races. Discrimination(same source) is "Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit." As I said before, that is exactly what police profiling does, it bases treatment of individuals on what category they can be fit into. 2. Police profiling feeds racial discrimination, which you failed to respond to. "By saying that profiling is acceptable, you make racist practices seem more acceptable not only to police, but also to the general public as well. You entrench that racism not just in hearts and minds, but in the very systems of justice that are meant to be unbiased and colorblind." Pro says "I would also like to make note of the fact that the resolution is "Police Profiling is a Good Thing", so unless you believe that all police profiling is bad because black criminals get pulled over more than white criminals I have no further arguments." I think that is a vast oversimplification of my argument, police profiling is a racist practice, no matter which race is targeted. Racism is a dehumanizing practice, and police profiling only feeds that practice. This is shown not only by the evidence from Patricia Williams, but also the story of the young African-American man who was humiliated because of the practice Pro says is a good thing. Absent evidence that a practice has any actual benefits in attaining what it is supposed to, in this case a lower crime rate, even the possibility it could be misused is enough to make it a bad practice. In this case it is far more than that, for not only is there no evidence it works, but multiple reasons it is a dehumanizing practice that goes counter to the ideals of our justice system.