Racial profiling does more long-term harm than short-term good. A half-day spent learning to prevent it is time well-invested.

A half-day spent learning to prevent it is time well-invested.

Let's look at the cost:

Assumptions - 51,500 cops for 4 hours each = 206,000 Hours of training
Average pay for officers = $15.00 / hour
Cost of training = $3,090,000.00

Solution 1:

Use the money to pay off law suits brought by the ACLU for racial profiling when the court rules in their favor.

Solution 2:

Send the following statement in the form of a directive to all officers:

A) Policing Impartially

1. Investigative detentions, traffic stops, arrests, searches, and property seizures by officers will be based on a standard of reasonable suspicion or probable cause in accordance with the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Officers must be able to articulate specific facts and circumstances that support reasonable suspicion or probable cause for investigative detentions, traffic stops, arrests nonconsensual searches, and property seizures. Except as provided below, officers shall not consider race/ethnicity in establishing either reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Similarly, except as provided below, officers shall not consider race/ethnicity in deciding to initiate even those nonconsensual encounters that do not amount to legal detentions or to request consent to search. Officers may take into account the reported race or ethnicity of a specific suspect or suspects based on trustworthy, locally relevant information
that links a person or persons of a specific race/ethnicity to a particular unlawful incident(s).
Race/ethnicity can never be used as the sole basis for probable cause or reasonable suspicion.

2. Except as provided above, race/ethnicity shall not be motivating factors in making law enforcement decisions.

or...

3. Spend over $3 million dollars for a worthless, ineffective, and largely ignored training program.

Guess which one the liberals support?

reverend-
Nice thoughts but reality is a bit different.I was waitressing (while in school) a couple of years ago in a popular downtown restarant frequented by city official types including special police units, I'll never forget one of their favorite jokes-What do you call it when a black women has an abortion? crime prevention! Another time was when a bi-racial couple walked in. Mind you this was a respectable looking couple no hip-hop gear ect, a group of officers called me over to their table with a nasty smirk one motioned towards the couple and said "just look at that makes you just want to puke don't it?
When the couple left several of the officers followed them out commenting lets se what we find sure enough they had the man spread eagle on ground the women up against the wall as much as she could (she was pregnant) no arrests were made they did not have any suspion of criminal intent (the cops in fact were off duty) just all in a nights fun. All of this happened and more in an azure blue liberal city Hindrakers in fact.
No I don't think diversity training does much good but Mr Noonan making light doesn't either.

I agree with darkwhite. Noonan is obviously not African American as he cannot comprehend what it is like merely to drive a car as one. You have to worry every time you are pulled over, which happens for even the minor infractions of 2 or 3 over, about not making a move like reaching for your wallet wrong and getting shot, or saying the wrong thing and getting thrown to the ground and cuffed, or not being believed that you are actually a vice president for a prominent corporation based in your city. It is a disgrace that the phrase "driving while black" even exists, and there are much worse cases of racial profiling that occur. So yeah, I think a half day might be alright. It's probably not enough.

The only other thing I can think to do with the 3 mil is to hire decent lawyers to defend the african americans wrongly put behind bars and sentenced to death because they can't afford a lawyer who will stay awake in court or talk to witnesses.

New Jersey is one of the most ethnically and racially diverse places in the country, and as a result, racial profiling, as such, is particularly unreliable when identifying perpetrators.

Nice thoughts but reality is a bit different.

Oh, really???

I was waitressing (while in school)...

Very touching stories. They had absolutely nothing to do with racial profiling or worthless training of officers about profiling at taxpayers' expense, but touching nonetheless. What you describe is racism, plain and simple. Do you really think four hours of training will correct this attitude?

No I don't think diversity training does much good

The topic, once again, is racial profiling by police officers - not diversity training. Do you have a concept for what racial profiling is? Diversity training is a whole nuther subject for a discussion on a different thread someday that exposes it as the racial divider it actually is, but it is not the subject here.

but Mr Noonan making light doesn't either.

Making light? You travel in some strange circles if thats what you call the article. Mark pointed out how stupid this idea is. He ridiculed it for the fraud it is. But he did not "make light" which actually means to use the subject as an object of humor. I didn't see anything funny here. I saw the sadness of stupid bureaucrats wasting taxpayer dollars to accomplish what could be achieved by a simple memo, directive, or set of orders at the morning get-together. And you yourself agreed that the money will likely be wasted.

Noonan is obviously not African American as he cannot comprehend what it is like merely to drive a car as one.

Logic is not your strong suit, right? Do you really believe that one must be black to understand prejudice? You can't possibly.

You have to worry every time you are pulled over, ...

More theatrics. And most of what you talked about has nothing to do with profiling. It has to do with racial prejudice and, to some extent, the day-to-day experience that police officers have to deal with. But it is not about profiling.

It is a disgrace that the phrase "driving while black" even exists, and there are much worse cases of racial profiling that occur.

That phrase, which I have never heard before, sounds like something that didn't come from law enforcement. More likely it is a phrase cooked up by some lawyers.

So yeah, I think a half day might be alright. It's probably not enough.

Why not? It isn't your money, right?

The only other thing I can think to do with the 3 mil is to hire decent lawyers to defend the african americans wrongly put behind bars and sentenced to death because they can't afford a lawyer who will stay awake in court or talk to witnesses.

Again, your entire rant has nothing to do with profiling. Is it that hard to stay on topic?

If officers receive a robbery suspect description as a hispanic male, then it is not considered racial profiling to look for a hispanic male. It would be nonsensical to check an 80-year old black woman. You know that, police officers know that, and your argument is diminished by you concluding your post in this way. Stopping police officers from profiling based on race does not stop them from doing their job in any way. As long as, when they pull someone over, they know WHY they are pulling the individual over and that the reason is not race, they are in the clear.

BTW: I have heard, with my own ears, the following conversation take place:

Officer 1 - "Why did you stop him?"
Officer 2 - "Being hispanic in a no-hispanic zone."

No joke. But they thought it was.

You know, the vast majority of people incarcerated are men. I think there is definitely some gender discrimination going on there. Are you telling me men commit more crimes than women? Or do police just target men more than women? Clearly our police officers need more gender diversity training and less gender profiling. Not only should they not single out the hispanic male mentioned in the original post, they should not single out the male. The APB should just state they are looking for an individual, and they should stop nobody lest they violate the human rights on an innocent person.

Just another episode in the touchie-feelie world we live in. Dump the common sense, it's about making everyone feel comfy.

The money? It's only taxpayer money and who ever cared about managing taxpayer money?

Well, if Attorney General Peter Harvey has has ordered it, he must have recognized a racial profiling problem in the police force. I'm assuming he knows more about it than anyone on this board.

As for the $3 MM, if you going to bring numbers into this, you have to go all the way. When a police officer stops someone, just because of his race, he's using government time and money that could be better spent elsewhere. When the officer searches the car of someone, just because he's Hispanic, he's wasting time (paid time) that could be better spent preventing actual crimes. If racial profiling does, in fact, exist, it's costing the state a lot of money! Not to mention the lawsuits that arise from unfair treatment. So, you have to include the reduction in racial profiling costs when you bring in the numbers.

And as for the effectiveness of the 1/2 day, I guess it depends on the speakers.

...It would be nonsensical to check an 80-year old black woman. You know that, police officers know that, and your argument is diminished by you concluding your post in this way.

Sure. That's why, as has been documented repeatedly, that only a certain percentage of the Middle Eastern passengers boarding a domestic flight are checked even though we are at war with jihadist terrorists of Middle Eastern descent. As soon as we start down the slippery slope, this is where we end up. Don't kid yourself that it will be otherwise. Evidence proves the point every day at airports where Middle Eastern men are allowed to board flights with little scrutiny while 80 year-old women have to remove their shoes and even submit to full body searches and scans.

Stopping police officers from profiling based on race does not stop them from doing their job in any way. As long as, when they pull someone over, they know WHY they are pulling the individual over and that the reason is not race, they are in the clear.

Agreed.

BTW: I have heard, with my own ears,...

Another cute anecdote that reeks of racism and has no component of racial profiling.

If there are allegations that they are profiling people based on race, they should all receive training.

First of all, if there is racial profiling it would fall into one of two categories. First, it would be officially sanctioned and/or mandated. That is cured by changing department policy.

The other possibility would be that it is the independent act of a racist officer in opposition to department policy. In that case, the officer should be given an order to cease and desist and if the officer continued the practice, fire him/her.

Any responsible company or government body should respond to such issues in this way. As a former police dispatcher, I attended 116 hours of TCLEOSE (Texas) classes along with patrol officers. The training, even when it concerned EO and political correctness, was always beneficial.

Very subjective assessment of the "training." I too was forced by my employer to attend what seemed like endless training of this PC, "touchy-feely" training which never once changed anyone's mind and tended to reinforce prejudices rather than reduce them. Racism in the workplace has no place and should not be tolerated. Employees who do not comply to company policies on the subject should be terminated. There are always openings in organizations that support racism, for example Robert Byrd's staff.

Well, if Attorney General Peter Harvey has has ordered it, he must have recognized a racial profiling problem in the police force.

Good to know you haven't come to your senses yet, qt. He's just playing the stupid, liberal PC game.

I'm assuming he knows more about it than anyone on this board.

Based on what? Your new-found faith in government? Don't make me laugh.

As for the $3 MM, if you going to bring numbers into this, you have to go all the way. When a police officer stops someone, just because of his race, he's using government time and money that could be better spent elsewhere. When the officer searches the car of someone, just because he's Hispanic, he's wasting time (paid time) that could be better spent preventing actual crimes.

So you agree that the training is a waste of time, only different than the waste of time you point out.

If racial profiling does, in fact, exist, it's costing the state a lot of money!

So let's spend even more? To correct a "problem" that you say "if it exists"? More of your typical liberal claptrap.

Not to mention the lawsuits that arise from unfair treatment. So, you have to include the reduction in racial profiling costs when you bring in the numbers.

That would be assuming that the worthless training would change behaviors, which it would not.

And as for the effectiveness of the 1/2 day, I guess it depends on the speakers.

I prefer Bose, myself. Tell me, qt, how does a flake like you keep from melting in all this summer heat?

Reverend-
Please clarify the difference between diversity training (training to deal with people of different cultures and races impartally)and training not to use racial profiling (training not to use stereo types when dealing with different races and cultures).
Mr Noonans example was poor at best as it left out a number of details - I've heard a good number of police calls, because most cops don't shut their radios off when on break unnies uniformed as opposed to detectives anyway. I've never heard hispanic male or any other race as sole descripter- small details such as approximite age ,height ,body build (not weight) and sometimes clothing or markers such as tatoos that are prominate. But the example here was just hispanic male nothing else, does this give the cops the right to stop every hispanic male in a 1 mile, 5 mile, 20 mile radius of the crime ? However you are right they wasted 3 million dollars on this training in NJ,however officers in my city get directives such as your example #2 quite frequently and I belive are required to sign at least one, they all agree with it, and when they are done laughing go on with business as always.But to play along we'll go with your example #2, what do you do with an officer who is caught breaking this code, moreover how do you prove it,
how many strikes does the officer get before he or she is suspended or fired? And what about the suspect or victim depending on how you look at it, what compensation does this person get if any? I see this costing alot more than $3 mil. in legal fees, time lost from the job(cops), court costs, and on and on. I'm sure that no time soon will NJ cops be stopping an 80 year female any race in conjunction with a crime commited by a male any race.The problem here is that attitude can not be changed by classes,directive, or any other external means.Oh and (off subject) NJ cops only make $15 an hour, that might be part of the problem.

Please clarify the difference...

Since I am not in law enforcement, I have no idea what they call "training" as far as racial profiling is concerned, but I will guess that it would depend on who conducts it. What would be relevant would be to create an understanding of what profiling is (as if they don't already know) and then to communicate the company policy that it will not be tolerated.

Diversity training, OTOH, is simply PC fluff aimed at "valuing differences." What is really going on in that kind of training (from my experience) is the liberal attempt to combat the traditional American pressure for people of diverse ethnic backgrounds to assimilate. Liberals cannot claim to represent the downtrodden, poor, weak, et al, if they assimilate, learn the language, and become productive members of society because once they are successful, they will quickly adopt the conservative point of view. Keeping them segregated into their little ethnic groups helps the liberals to exploit them for their political purposes. Now some liberals will deny that, and claim that my statements just underline my intolerance but that would all be baloney. I am a big supporter of equal opportunity; I am against racial discrimination and think racial prejudice is a weakness.

Mr Noonans example was poor at best...

I disagree. If police are afraid of the PC patrol, they will be afraid to NOT include people who are not Hispanic for fear of being accused of profiling.

...does this give the cops the right to stop every hispanic male in a 1 mile, 5 mile, 20 mile radius of the crime?

Depends on the situation. What if the only information was that the bad guy/gal was driving a white Chevy Blazer? Would it be profiling to stop every white Chevy Blazer in the same radius?

However you are right they wasted 3 million dollars on this training in NJ,...

Of course I am. No one has yet to show me evidence that prejudice can be "trained" away in a 4 hour class.

however officers in my city get directives such as your example #2 quite frequently and I belive are required to sign at least one, they all agree with it, and when they are done laughing go on with business as always.

And for that you'd support more training? If that is really happening, the supervisors should be taking action against the officers. If not, the action should be against them.

But to play along we'll go with your example #2, what do you do with an officer who is caught breaking this code, moreover how do you prove it, how many strikes does the officer get before he or she is suspended or fired?

I don't know how to answer that exactly. I think it should be handled on a case-by-case basis with full knowledge that if the violation being severe enough could end up with immediate dismissal and possible prosecution for violating the victim's civil rights.

And what about the suspect or victim depending on how you look at it, what compensation does this person get if any?

As with any injustice, the victim should receive compensation in line with the damage done. Hurt pride, low payment. Physical or serious psychological damage, big payment.

I see this costing alot more than $3 mil. in legal fees, time lost from the job(cops), court costs, and on and on.

Why is it so difficult for you to realize that cost is secondary? We must do what is right first and take care of the cost later. I used cost originally to show how much the useless training program would cost, that's all.

The problem here is that attitude can not be changed by classes,directive, or any other external means.

Believe me, if a cop knows his job is at stake, changes will be quick in coming.

Oh and (off subject) NJ cops only make $15 an hour, that might be part of the problem.

It was just an example. I was too lazy to go look up their pay scale.

Oh, and one more thing. The goal should not be to change attitudes - it should be to change behavior. Behavior is what hurts people.

C'mon everyone... if you're a racial minority, young and male, then you're statistically more likely to commit a crime. Police know this, so they're more suspicious of us. But just because I'm 'more likely' to commit a crime doesn't mean I should be subjected to harder scrutiny. (I'm a Muckleshoot Indian.)

I've been pulled over for not signalling, subjected to a full search of my car and asked questions about where I was going, where i've been, and why I 'wasn't at home'. The officer even called me "Chief". Profiling? Absolutely. Racist? Absolutely. Degrading? Absolutely. Waste of my time and taypayer money? Absolutely. I bit my tongue instead of telling them to pull over the people screaming past at 75MPH who were the real danger on the highway, or perhaps *gasp* even patrolling one of the local neighborhoods. How many minutes are wasted pulling people like me over instead of protecting people from real criminals? Probably more than 4 hours.

Yes, it costs the state money. If $3 million saves some citizens this embarassment, taxpayers the money, and prevents some real crimes for occurring, then it is worth it.

If you don't think it's worth it, show some evidence. Opinions are just hot air. Show us a report done by a credible source (the Hertiage Foundation, Focus on the Family, and Amnesty International don't count) that shows that racial profiling training doesn't help.

I can show you several that show that it does. Here's one, just released today: http://www.wsp.wa.gov/reports/wsu_2005_report.pdf You could also look at reports done by the Miami-Dade police. Minnesota's 65 departments did a similar study.

Show us some evidence that it doesn't help, we're willing to listen.

Yes, it costs the state money. If $3 million saves some citizens this embarassment, taxpayers the money, and prevents some real crimes for occurring, then it is worth it.

Its not about the money, although money for a 4 hour course is going to go to waste for sure. Its about doing the right thing. The right thing is not some worthless feel good course that everyone ignores and goes right back to work. Been there, Done that. Got the T-shirt.

If you don't think it's worth it, show some evidence.

I have the best evidence you can want. Me. I've been to all the training on all the PC subjects many times (even conducted some), and my experience is that it changes no one's mind about their prejudices. Prejudices are deep-seated and internalized. It takes a traumatic event to change them. Sitting in a 4 hour sensitivity class will do nothing except waste time and money.

Opinions are just hot air.

Doesn't stop you, though, right?

Show us a report done by a credible source (the Hertiage Foundation, Focus on the Family, and Amnesty International don't count) that shows that racial profiling training doesn't help.

Why do you need a study? Have you never attended such training? That should be all the evidence you need.

I can show you several that show that it does. Here's one, just released today:...

I looked at the pdf file and it had nothing to do with training as far as I could see.

Show us some evidence that it doesn't help, we're willing to listen.

Third time you've asked the same question. It shows me you don't understand the fundamental problem here. Just as you cannot legislate away prejudice, so you cannot "train" it away. And you should not even be trying to do so. Employees such as police officers, should be made aware of the organization's policies on racial profiling, and the consequences for violating them. And if the officer decides to go against those policies, he/she should be punished. If the offense is repeated or severe, dismissal should follow. If the violation is actionable, the legal system should press charges. But forget about the training - it is a waste.

Redman4,

If you've been harrassed by the police on account of your ethnicity, then you should be able to provide us in easily available public records the result of the complaint you filed with whatever oversight organization relevant to the police department you had trouble with...if you didn't file such a complaint, then we have to presume that your alleged event never happened.

All of us wish to know when a police officer gives evidence of a bias against a citizen - it matters not what the particular bias is; any bias by a police officer in the performance of his or her duties is something which should be thoroughly investigated and, if sustained, punishment should be meted out...but we are not about to condemn entire police forces on a charge of bigotry. We will not believe that an entire police force is made up of nothing but bigots - if you've run across a bigoted cop, then you should be able to provide name and badge number.

I'm sick and damn tired of people causing nothing but trouble for the police...literal thousands of police man-hours are spent every year in every police department filing out forms as a result of political-correct garbage. Our police have much more important things to do than answer the latest charge of the local Al Sharpton looking to squeeze some swag out of a cowardly State or local government.