Racial Profiling: Wenn nur die Hautfarbe zählt
Verdacht aufgrund ethnischer Merkmale – ein Prozess in München soll klären, ob die Polizei zur umstrittenen Praxis des „Racial Profiling“ greifen darf.
Es ist eine Form der Diskriminierung, die es offiziell in Deutschland nicht geben darf, unter der Menschen mit dunkler Hautfarbe aber immer wieder leiden: Wenn etwa Polizisten an einem Bahnhof alle anderen Fahrgäste unbehelligt lassen, aber Passanten mit afrikanischen oder arabischen Eltern gezielt kontrollieren, steht schnell der Verdacht im Raum, dass die Sicherheitskräfte sie nur aufgrund erkennbarer ethnischer Merkmale zu einem Risiko erklären.
http://m.tagesspiegel.de/politik/racial-profiling-wenn-nur-die-hautfarbe-zaehlt/11604882.html?
1 Comment
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
he was: a rogue police ofcifer.In the 911 call, the woman did not mention the race of the fellows she witnessed at the front door of the professors house (in which the ofcifer claimed in his police report). Also, the woman mentioned that the two people at the door had suitcases (as opposed to backpacks, in which the ofcifer mentioned in his report). In addition, the woman stated that the individuals probably lived in the home.When the ofcifer went to the home, he went looking for burglars as opposed to looking for facts, or confirmation of what the woman reported (that she was more concerned than anything).Upon seeing Mr. Gates in the home, the ofcifer profiled (as thr professor has alleged correctly so) him (because remember, the woman at no time stated in the 911 call the race or ethnicity of the individuals at the professors front door), immediately got into a defensive posture (more than likely because he was confronted by a scary Black man), and went from being a police ofcifer looking for facts to one looking tfor a confrontation or to make a arrest (therefore, using a more assertive tone with the professor as one of patience and understanding).When the ofcifer asked for Mr. Gates to come outside, he asked without any explanantion as to why he was doing this to someone who was residing in his own home but was unaware of the 911 call that was placed by the woman.The professor (rightly) became alarmed and quite agitated at the ofcifers tone (as most of us would have)because (by all accounts) he had done nothing wrong and was presumed by the ofcifer guilty until proven innocent. In the process of the ofcifer’s investigation, the professor produced identification (twice over) to the ofcifer (who was in the process of trying to confirm his suspicion of Mr. Gates’ guilt), but that was not good enough for the ofcifer who continued his investigation (thus agitating Mr. Gates even more).After finally coming to the conclusion that the professor was the legal resident of his home, the ofcifer felt the need to teach the professor a lesson for having the gall to question his behavior, he lured him outside of the home and immediately arrested him for timultuous behavior (something that many agree was totally outrageous considering he wasn’t a threat of harm to anyone, including the ofcifer himself).It is obvious that the poilce in this case acted stupidly (as so eloquently put forth by the president) and falsely arrested the professor; therefore, they ought to be sued by the professor for that very reason.All this talk of having a beer with the president to squash this incident is an attempt to stifle the argument that Blacks are profiled at alarming rates in this country, no matter who or what they are. To eliminate such an historic moment, is akin to Rosa Parks obliging with that ofcifer’s request get to the back of the bus (that’s how powerful a moment I feel this is).As the joke goes, What do you call a Black man with a PHD? A ni@@r!