Policing, Biased
Policing, Biased
Biased policing refers to the practice of law enforcement officers or agencies of systematically targeting certain groups in society for suspicious activities. Instead of being judged as innocent until proven guilty, targeted groups tend to be considered guilty first and questioned about their innocence later. Police biasing often takes the form of racial and ethnic profiling. However, biased policing may also be directed at gay men and lesbians, people who occupy the lower-class rungs of society, or groups that do not exemplify the normative behaviors expected in society (e.g., biker gangs, religious cults). In the past, research on biased policing was typically centered on local and state law enforcement agencies, such as city and state police and sheriff’s departments. However, since about the mid-1990s there has been increasing research on federal law enforcement agencies that engage in biased policing (e.g., the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security).
Biased policing is a form of institutional and systemic racism. Using Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s (2006) notion of the “racialized social system,” biased policing can be seen as one form of social control against groups who are considered “outsiders.” As such, biased policing helps to maintain the white middle-class structure that dominates U.S. society. This form of negative profiling has existed in American society since the slavery era, when “black codes” were institutionalized to regulate both free and enslaved blacks (Jordon 1968; Marable 2000). Both groups were heavily monitored by slave patrols, whose duties included not only punishing runaway slaves but also free blacks who were considered threatening to whites. These slave patrols were usually organized groups of three to six white men who patrolled plantations, state borders, and state roads, profiling people who did not fit the skin color and phenotype of white Europeans.
Although most law enforcement agencies have policies that clearly state that any form of biased policing, including racial profiling, is deemed unacceptable, the American Civil Liberties Union maintains that tens of thousands of Americans face some sort of biased policing everyday. Furthermore after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Virginia, biased policing and, more specifically, racial profiling reached a new high in regard to the number of people who are affected by these extreme forms of social control.
The form that biased policing takes varies depending on the law enforcement agencies involved, the personal characteristics of the law enforcement officers, whether state or federal laws are involved, and the location. For example, after the passage in 2001 of the Patriot Act, designed to expand the authority of U.S. law enforcement agencies for the purpose of fighting the threat of terrorism in the United States, an increase in racial profiling against Arab and Muslim Americans took place and was justified under the guise of fear (Muneer 2002). Forms of biased policing include the stopping of motorists, the detention of a person or group of people, or the searching of a person’s vehicle, home, or body based on any number of characteristics, including race, ethnicity, gender, age, or income status. Common forms of biased policing include harassment of specific groups of people at malls, workplaces, and even political gatherings. For example, numerous blacks reported being harassed by local police on their way to voting booths during the 2000 presidential election in Florida. In addition a large number of Latinos report harassment by law enforcement officers on their way to work, school, or home as a result of controversies concerning immigration in the United States.
RACIAL PROFILING
Of the various forms of biased policing, the most notable and well researched concerns discrimination by race or ethnicity. This type of biased policing is known as racial profiling and refers to the systematic targeting of a person or group based solely on race or ethnicity. In other words, other than a person’s race or ethnicity, there is no reasonable justification for stopping or detaining him or her. The issue of racial profiling has been such a frequent problem for blacks and Latinos in the United States that new slang terms have been created to describe such instances (Lundman and Kaufman 2003). For example, the stopping and searching of blacks and Latinos for “suspected” traffic violations is commonly referred to as DWB (i.e., driving while black) or DWM (i.e., driving while Mexican).
After the 2001 terrorist attacks, U.S. law enforcement agencies slightly shifted their focus on blacks and Latinos to include Arabs and Muslim Americans and even South Asian Americans as racially profiled targets. The matter has become increasingly complex as poll data indicate that a majority of blacks and Latinos may support racial profiling against Arab and Muslim Americans.
COUNTERARGUMENTS
Although numerous studies indicate that biased policing and racial profiling continue to be a major issue in the United States, a number of studies argue that the issue of racial profiling has been overstated or that such practices are necessary given the terrorist threat. For instance, Michael Smith and Matthew Petrocelli (2001) argued that while black drivers were pulled over more frequently than white drivers, there was no data that suggested that vehicles driven by blacks were more frequently searched. Moreover, controlling for certain variables, blacks were more likely to be issued a warning, whereas white drivers were more likely to be ticketed or arrested. In addition to research that favors biased policing, numerous articles in the mainstream press argue that racial profiling does not occur. For example, Heather MacDonald (2003) reported in the Los Angeles Times that police officers who were labeled as racist were in fact just doing their jobs. MacDonald further argued that what appeared to be racial profiling was really just “good policing.” However, the problem with the majority of such studies and articles resides in their limited sampling techniques; as such, they do not reflect the overwhelming data that find that biased policing and racial profiling continue to be major issues in the United States.
SEE ALSO Colorism; Crime and Criminology; Discrimination; Discrimination, Racial; Discrimination, Statistical; Inequality, Racial; Law and Order; Phenotype; Race-Blind Policies; Race-Conscious Policies; Racism; September 11, 2001; Signals; Stereotypes
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. 2006. Racism without Racists: Color-blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States. 2nd ed. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield.
Eberhardt, Jennifer L., Paul G. Davies, Valerie J. Purdie-Vaughns, and Sheri Lynn Johnson. 2006. Looking Deathworthy: Perceived Stereotypicality of Black Defendants Predicts Capital-Sentencing Outcomes. Psychological Science 17: 383–386.
Jordon, Winthrop D. 1968. White over Black: American Attitudes toward the Negro, 1550–1812. New York: Norton.
Lundman, Richard J., and Robert L. Kaufman. 2003. Driving While Black: Effects of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender on Citizen Self-Reports of Traffic Stops and Police Actions. Criminology 41 (1): 195–220.
MacDonald, Heather. 2003. What Looks like Profiling Might Just Be Good Policing. Los Angeles Times, January 19.
Marable, Manning. 2000. How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America: Problems in Race, Political Economy, and Society. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: South End.
Muneer, Ahmad. 2002. Homeland Insecurities: Racial Violence the Day after September 11. Social Text-72 20 (3): 101–115.
Smith, Michael R., and Matthew Petrocelli. 2001. Racial Profiling? A Multivariate Analysis of Police Traffic Stop Data. Police Quarterly 4 (1): 4–27.
David G. Embrick