I am not claiming that profiling will catch only terrorists and leave
out all non-terrorists with 100% accuracy. It is only meant to increase
our odds. Here are a few objections raised-
Objection: "You cannot be sure from appearance who is a Muslim."
True, just as today you cannot tell who is a terrorist form appearance.
Databases have to be developed, intuitive judgments sharpened,
passports and other background checked in advance.
Objection: What about non-muslim terrorists?
Other systems will need to be developed to address other risks not
covered by one profile.
Objection: What about innocents getting profiled?
Effectively that is happening now, when everyone is subjected to the
same screening. It would be no worse under profiling; you get checked,
nothing found, thank you for your cooperation, please move on. (Indeed,
profiling is simply an attempt to minimize this, freeing up resources
to focus on riskier groups instead.)
To me, you seem overly concerned that "Brown non-Muslims" might get
scrutinized. We shouldn't mind that. If a thief matches my description
or was wearing similar dress, the police might stop and question me. It
is my duty to cooperate with that for the greater good. You seem to be
carrying the old Indian bug that we need an exception for ourselves,
the greater good be damned.
: The problem with profiling is implementation...
There is no problem with profiling except political will. It just means
focusing on known risk factors. It is not meant to be perfect or
eliminate the need for further vigilance. |