At 12:20 PM 3/22/01 -0600, Michael Atherton wrote:
>
>First off, I think that we need to make clear the distinction between racial
>profiling and CODEFOR. As far as I understand it racial profiling
>involves the development of statistical profiles that are then used
>to select individuals for investigation. In my opinion racial profiling is
>a clear violation of individual rights. CODEFOR on the other hand
>applies not to individuals, but to geographic areas selected for "enhanced"
>policing. If I stated these concepts incorrectly please let me know.
Racial profiling and CODEFOR seem to be so closely intertwined
that it is hard to separate them. In the media, police and their defenders
have used CODEFOR to defend data showing that blacks are stopped more often
than whites. Katherine Kersten's February 28 Strib column is an example of
this.
Take a look at Josh Kroll's post "Racial Profiling and Code4" from 3/20 and
mine "Re: code 4" from 3/17. Some of us white folks who live or travel
through CODEFOR-intensive neighborhoods
and are honest enough to admit to the occassional equipment violation have
some suspicion that CODEFOR is being administered on racial as well as
geographic lines.
Rosalind Nelson
Bancroft
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
