On 1-5-2010 20:50, Warp wrote:
> andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> On 1-5-2010 19:13, Warp wrote:
>>> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>> No, but the notion that you can pick someone up because they *look* like 
>>>> an illegal immigrant (which BTW violates the 4th amendment right to 
>>>> protection against unreasonable search/seizure) *is* patently racist.
>>>   Why does it have to be racism?
> 
>> Racism is here used as a general term of judging people by what cultural 
>> group they appear to belong to based on how they look.
> 
>   I understand "juding" in official terms to mean to convict someone of a
> crime. If people are convicted there solely because of how they look, then
> yes, that would be racism. Is that so?
> 
>   The colloqualism "to judge" which means to have a prejudiced opinion
> about someone is not necessarily the same thing as the profiling work that
> law enforcement needs to do by necessity in order to get better chances of
> catching criminals. It's simply applied statistics.

It was meant colloquial.

>> There is another way that even takes less time and is not illegal 
>> because of various international laws: don't question people unless you 
>> have a serious reason to believe that they are illegal (or you are 
>> questioning them anyway because of a non-related suspicion or check).
> 
>   And then watch illegal immigration raise. Right.

Wrong.

>   It's better to allow illegal immigration than to possibly offend someone.

It it not about offence, it is about human rights and/or the local law.

>   Do you advocate that mentality with all crimes? Or is this only related
> to illegal immigration?
> 
>> Frankly I find your reasoning that "I know there is an illegal immigrant 
>> in this country, so I have to check everybody that looks like he might 
>> be it" quite disturbing. But that is not unusual.
> 
>   If find your argument that "the police should not be looking for the
> illegal immigrant because doing so might offend someone" even more
> disturbing.

They have all the right to do so, just not based on looks alone.

Post a reply to this message