‘Profiling’ Is Not a Dirty Word

Pajamas Media ^ | November 25, 2010 | Dan Miller

[DanMiller]

We tip-toe around it because we have allowed politically correct labels to make it seem to be so.

President Obama, whose public approval has reached a new low of thirty-nine percent, and his administration are under fire and

the consensus in the administration seems to be that the Department of Homeland Security didn’t do a good enough job of getting out in front of this story and communicating to travelers. This is the default position for the administration when political troubles arise: The product was fine, but the marketing was poor.

There is an unfortunate tendency to think in terms of bumper stickers; when they are too complex, labels — racism, sexism, and profiling — are used. There are three basic steps in the labeling process:

Give something bad a label;

Apply the same label to other things;

Treat them as though they were all the same.

Medical professionals often use profiling in diagnosing medical conditions. Members of various racial and ethnic groups groups show marked statistical susceptibility to various diseases. These factors should be and are considered. So, obviously, do males and females. Males are not generally screened for ovarian cancer nor are women normally screened for testicular or prostate cancer.

The government requires some profiling based on race, ethnicity, and sex. One aspect of this is called affirmative action, which mandates benefits for people in racial, ethnic, and gender groups deemed historically disadvantaged, without regard to whether the beneficiaries, as individuals, have ever been disadvantaged personally because of their race, ethnicity, or sex. Conversely, affirmative action mandates disadvantages for people not in those groups, regardless of their personal situations; it’s pretty much a zero sum game.

[DanMiller]

Members of some identifiable groups have been abnormally prone to blowing up airplanes. Gray haired old ladies, Episcopalian clergy, small children, and most members of other identifiable groups have not so far done that and seem unlikely to do so now. That is a reality and one which must be considered quite seriously. If it is not considered, airport security procedures will be far less effective and far more intrusive than they could and should be. As long as there is persistent and blind adherence to the dictates of political correctness they will not get better and may even get worse.

[goldstategop]

Law enforcement does profiling. We see it on TV crime shows. Why is it considered politically incorrect not to apply it to aviation security? You focus on the people who commit terrorist acts, in the same way you focus on the people who commit a crime. The police doesn’t go out and arrest a bunch of people. They arrest a suspect. The TSA doesn’t really know what its doing.

[Concho]

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

[samtheman]

I have a prediction, which I hope DOESN’T come true:

The terrorists are going to do an end-run around all this silly airport security with a major strike using a major weapon inside a city (dirty bomb or something else)... a strike that COULD be prevented by profiling, preventive police work and tougher visa controls but won’t be.

Hundreds (or more) will die and the TSA will continue sticking their fingers up their own and America’s collective butts to no avail.

I hope I’m wrong. But it’s what I fear.

[bert]

Profiling is a made up tactic for defense lawyers to reduce sentences or get better plea deals for black criminals.

The problem we now experience in the airports is blood on the hands of defense lawyers and the lawless culture of urban black America.

Urban blacks chose a criminal life style and the lawyers force America to accept it.

[bert]

Of course you are right.

They will cease the attack on the well defended front and go after a flank.

When soldiers go to war against lawyers, lawyers die

[biggredd1]

Rick Santorum mentioned on TV the other night that “profiling” is a dirty word so he chose other words. I coulda screamed!

[goldstategop]

Common sense is missing in the Homeland Security Department. Has it caught one terrorist in the past decade? Zero. But it keeps on mindlessly doing things that won’t work and will never catch a single terrorist but will inconvenience and humiliate those of us who aren’t.

[Spok]

Affirmative action is racial discrimination and profiling. We’ve let the left hijack our language and use it as a weapon. I never let misuse of a term or an over generalization pass in an argument.

[NewHampshireDuo]

Unfortunately I think such an event would be the signal to drastically expand the TSA to the point that we see them everywhere. The unionized TSA will be Obama’s huge civilian security force.

[goldstategop]

Every one of us profiles every day. What we have for breakfast, what we will do at work, what friends we will meet for lunch, where we will have dinner, how we spend our time with our families. Its called making a decision, stupid. Treating every one like a potential terrorist is just passing the buck.

[samtheman]

You are right. For the safety of Americans everywhere, elections must be suspended and Our Dear Leader must remain in office indefinitely, to protect us and keep us from harm.

[R0CK3T]

Profiling is actually an ingrained part of human intelligence.

Smart people look for patterns of behavioral probability in everything they do and they do this for many reasons. We see this all the time in sports, we see this in business, we live this in every aspect of our lives. Many examples can be given.

If we observe something happening and we take away that this is now a predictable pattern of statistical response we call that “Learning” and react to it in the future as to leverage that probability to optimize our personal success.

Successful Businesses operate with this as an undeniable fact of life. I would offer that modern Quality improvements completely revolve around the idea of using data to manage successfully (from modern concepts of Six Sigma going back to Deming and Schehart).

If we have data that correlates to a probable outcome and refuse to act in a way as to have learned from that then we are people who simply will not learn. I would label that as being fatally ignorant.

What the Left implies when it claims “Profiling”, is the absolute absence of logic and learning - and if you disagree with their fantasy world then you must be a racist.

For a group who constantly chides Conservatives for their “so called belief in this fictional character Conservatives call God” they sure have a Disney-like belief in this fantasy that facts and data should have no bearing on future results.

[goldstategop]

Liberals believe that what we observe and what deduction from the facts sensibly lead us to, should be disallowed if they hurt someone’s feelings. And these are the people who claim science and reason ought to guide our judgment. Until aviation security enters the picture and then we shouldn’t be allowed to use the scientific method because it will offend Muslim feelings! So that is where we are today.

[beckysueb]

I just heard an airline pilot on a radio show call in and he said TSA would NEVER pull an Arab man out of a line and wand him. Too politically incorrect so they firure they have come up with a solution by scanning or groping everybody. I also understand Muslim women are exempt from this groping.

[Natural Law]

What I find most disturbing about the enhanced TSA screening is that it is not a temporary measure that we must endure until terrorism is defeated. It is a permanent intrusion on our liberties that will only get worse over time because we have no plan for victory. Hell, our government won’t even name our enemy or say the word victory!