Racial Profiling vs. Affirmative Action
Christopher Kerr
foundation: make generalizations about an entire group of people based
on their race.
The cabbie that won't pick up the black man dressed impeccably on the
curb is no different than the bureaucrat that gives advantage to the
unknown black on the admissions form. They both are prejudging an
individual based on their membership in a group.
The child of a middle-class black family should not receive a benefit
that a white kid from poverty-stricken rural America is denied. The
black driver should not be presumed to be suspect of criminal conduct
simply by the color of his skin.
Governmental policy that codifies race-consciousness simply preserves
the evil that brought us such depradations as slavery and Jim Crow to
begin with. As long as these programs exist, Americans will be set
against Americans and racial tensions will be exacerbated.
If we could get the liberals to admit that affirmative action is a
violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and the
conservatives to admit that racial profiling does the same, this country
could take one significant step forward in racial healing.
Christopher
Dutch Armstrong
The cabbie who won't pick up blacks is just playing the odds and rightly
so. Picking up a stranger is like walking onto an airplane that hasn't been
checked for passengers carrying guns, bombs, etc. I highly doubt you would
take that sort of chance either. Let me put it to you this way. If you
start picking apples out of a box and half of them are rotten you can assume
that the whole box is bad (or about to go bad) so you throw the whole damn
thing out. Its common sense 101. Cabbies don't like to risk their lives
and who can blame them so perhaps you should choose another example of
"unfair" profiling.
Christopher Kerr
> The cabbie who won't pick up blacks is just playing the odds and rightly
> so.
The salient response to this type of argument goes as follows: is this
Las Vegas-styled rationale constitutional? It is not.
> Picking up a stranger is like walking onto an airplane that hasn't been
> checked for passengers carrying guns, bombs, etc. I highly doubt you would
> take that sort of chance either. Let me put it to you this way. If you
> start picking apples out of a box and half of them are rotten you can assume
> that the whole box is bad (or about to go bad) so you throw the whole damn
> thing out.
What would be your source for informing us that you have sure confidence
that one-half of a rather sizeable sample is not to your particular
affinities?
> Its common sense 101.
I have an idea you will be held back, and will be asked to have another
look at 101, and how it does, or does not, conform to the ideology laid
down by the founding fathers.
> Cabbies don't like to risk their lives
> and who can blame them so perhaps you should choose another example of
> "unfair" profiling.
I understand the mentality of the cabbies. I'm not asking you whether
you consider this to be "rational discrimination". I'm asking you
whether it is constitutional.
Christopher
elfatvis
<ckho...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Racial profiling and affirmative action share the same race-conscious
> foundation: make generalizations about an entire group of people based
> on their race.
>
> The cabbie that won't pick up the black man dressed impeccably on the
> curb is no different than the bureaucrat that gives advantage to the
> unknown black on the admissions form. They both are prejudging an
> individual based on their membership in a group.
>
> The child of a middle-class black family should not receive a benefit
> that a white kid from poverty-stricken rural America is denied. The
> black driver should not be presumed to be suspect of criminal conduct
> simply by the color of his skin.
>
> Governmental policy that codifies race-consciousness simply preserves
> the evil that brought us such depradations as slavery and Jim Crow to
> begin with. As long as these programs exist, Americans will be set
> against Americans and racial tensions will be exacerbated.
>
> If we could get the liberals to admit that affirmative action is a
> violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and the
> conservatives to admit that racial profiling does the same, this country
> could take one significant step forward in racial healing.
>
> Christopher
Reasons against Affirmative Action:
http://www.collegeboard.org/press/senior99/html/satt4.html
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/condition98/c9816h01.GIF
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/condition98/c9818h01.GIF
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/condition98/c9819h01.GIF
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/condition98/c9817h01.GIF
Reasons for police racial profiling:
http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/1995/pdf/t410.pdf
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/ageracesex.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/kidsrates.txt
Unlike the energizer bunny, the jungle bunny is going no where fast.
http://209.207.161.114/jr_nschool.zip
No igual al conejo energizer, el conejo de la jungla no va a ningun
lugar rapido.
©1999 elfatvis
--
Free audio & video emails, greeting cards and forums
Talkway - http://www.talkway.com - Talk more ways (sm)
Chatt_town
You are comparing apples and oranges. AA came about as a result of things
like the cab drivers and what not. What makes you think if the cabbie does
something like this, that people in so called corporate America doesn't do
it. AA is simply there to level the playing field of oppurtunity and not a
handout. The reason it is not working is because the people that caused a
need for it are the ones that are being made to put it into play and don't
want it to work. Example. This a true story. A government agency decides
they are going to make an effort to recruit so called minority "college"
students . So they go to Atlanta and set up a booth in a hotel that starts
at 190 a night. First of all. there are many Whites that can't afford to
stay in this hotel. What made them think that young Black students would be
there. Second, why not go to Morehouse or Spellman or Clark and set up. Its
obvious that they never intended on really recruiting. This is the problem.
Another thing is if people would just do right to begin with there would
never be a need for these programs. So instead of raising hell about "AA",
raise hell at the people that are causing a need for it.
Peace,
Chatt_town
Christopher Kerr wrote in message <386A90...@worldnet.att.net>...
trudogg®
> If we could get the liberals to admit that affirmative action is a
> violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and the
> conservatives to admit that racial profiling does the same, this country
> could take one significant step forward in racial healing.
Affirmative action was enacted to 'level the playing field', to
redress past wrongs and discriminatory practices. Call it a temporary
helper to the constitution...it is in the process of being phased out
now.
Racial profiling is flat discriminatory and to this day I'm amazed
that they get away with it. Racial healing will come when everyone,
repeat everyone stops talking and starts listening. When the mouth is
closed and the ears are open, maybe...just maybe the chance to meet
and understand someone will occur.
The Reaper
probably is shit. Just like you!
The Reaper
is called Criminal Profiling. It just so happens that most criminals are
non-white which you niggers will always call discrimination. Sorry, we
can't match criminals one for one, we just jail and execute them.
The Reaper
better term] based on their skin color. This has been declared
unconstitutional by the courts.
Not everyone can be a mechanic, doctor or engineer. It takes work,
effort and dedication of the individual concerned. Something severely
lacking in niggers.
> >If we could get the liberals to admit that affirmative action is a
> >violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and the
> >conservatives to admit that racial profiling does the same, this country
> >could take one significant step forward in racial healing.
> >
> >Christopher
Chatt_town
effort and dedication of the individual concerned. Something severely
lacking in niggers.
Reap,
So what you are saying is you are not a mechanic, Doctor or engineer. If
thats your definition of "AA". What is "revenue sharing" or "Bailouts" to
you?
The Reaper wrote in message <386BCD87...@mindspring.com>...
Chatt_town
Yea your right to some degree. I have no problem with what your are saying.
Getting it done will be a task though because they didn't even want to
"address the past" as you stated. Furthermore, while they are addressing
the past, they are making very little progress in making sure it doesn't
happen again. Believe me. I'm for what you are talking about. Lets get rid
of "everyones" crutch. You want to get rid of "AA". Thats fine. Lets also
get rid of this "good ole boy" network. You have to be willing to stop it
all to truly make things better.
Peace,
Chatt_town
trudogg® wrote in message ...
> Christopher Kerr wrote...
>
>> If we could get the liberals to admit that affirmative action is a
>> violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and the
>> conservatives to admit that racial profiling does the same, this country
>> could take one significant step forward in racial healing.
>
trudogg®
> Yea your right to some degree. I have no problem with what your are saying.
> Getting it done will be a task though because they didn't even want to
> "address the past" as you stated. Furthermore, while they are addressing
> the past, they are making very little progress in making sure it doesn't
> happen again. Believe me. I'm for what you are talking about. Lets get rid
> of "everyones" crutch. You want to get rid of "AA". Thats fine. Lets also
> get rid of this "good ole boy" network. You have to be willing to stop it
> all to truly make things better.
I personally don't think affirmative action has had enough of a chance
to satisfy it's stated goals. When I said 'phased out' my meaning was
that more and more people are looking at AA in a negative way. More
legislation is being written to end the process. To me that spells the
beginning of the end.
Addressing the past...consider that Kennedy sent the CR bill to
Congress in '63, LBJ didn't sign it until '65...and even then he took
probably a month getting his arm untwisted and out of his, uh...nether
regions after he inked the paper. Fact is people were more committed
to the cause and directed in their efforts back then. Some crumbs have
fallen off of the table and too many folks have decided that they're
now fat and happy. I've always felt that the crumbs comin' down were a
little too fat and grease laden for ingestion purposes...tends to clog
the arteries and eventually stop the 'heart'.
'They' aka 'good ole boys network' ain't gonna initiate change unless
it's six inches in front of their face and noisy. This kind of noise
isn't always measured in decibels either...$$$ makes the loudest
retort of all. But to make the money talk there has to be
cohesion...and that is comin' up short.