Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguments on racial profiling
Arguments on racial profiling
Racial profiling ethics in law enforcement
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Arguments on racial profiling
Rudeness is not a crime. Nevertheless, many people have found themselves in handcuffs simply for being rude to or shouting profanities at a police officer. But should mouthing-off to a cop get you arrested?
Unless you are threatening the police officer or are using “fighting words” to incite a violent response, the answer is no.
Your First Amendment Right to Be Rude
The First Amendment’s protection of free speech, while not absolute, allows citizens to express themselves to police officers even if that expression is rude, insulting, profane, obnoxious, or verbally abusive. As the U.S. Supreme Court noted, "[t]he freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state." City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 462 (1987).
Following that logic, courts
…show more content…
across the country have thrown own charges or overturned convictions that were based on nothing more than the fact that the accused was saying things to the officer that they did not like. A June 2015 decision by the Supreme Court of Washington state is a prime example. A teenager was arrested and ultimately convicted for obstruction after he yelled at an officer who was trying to arrest and appeared to be abusive toward his sister. While the teen refused to stop watching the officer’s conduct as he was ordered to and continued to yell at the officer (including calling him a “m---f---er)”, he in no way physically interfered with the officer’s performance of his duties. The Court overturned the conviction, stating that: “First Amendment values have occupied a crucial place in shaping our democracy. Cases have consistently and strongly held that people cannot be held liable when exercising their right to speak. While [defendant’s] words may have been disrespectful, discourteous, and annoying, they are nonetheless constitutionally protected.” State v. E.J.J., No. 88694-6 (Wash. Jun 25, 2015) Just Because You Shouldn’t Be Arrested Doesn’t Mean That You Won’t In this case, as in many others, the ultimate vindication of the accused for exercising their First Amendment rights came only after they were wrongfully arrested, charged, or convicted of a crime.
Just because you shouldn’t be arrested for expressing your “disrespectful, discourteous, and annoying” words and opinions towards an officer doesn’t mean he or she still won’t arrest you for doing so. You may recall that the tragic arrest of Sandra Bland in Texas only came after the officer perceived her as being disrespectful. And just because you have the right to mouth-off to a cop doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do in a given …show more content…
situation. “Fighting Words” Are Not Protected Additionally, if the things you say to an officer are considered “fighting words,” they are not protected by the First Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has defined “fighting words” as words "which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace” and are words that are "likely to cause an average addressee to fight." Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 572
(1942). Whether what you say at will actually be considered “fighting words” in a given case is difficult to determine in the abstract. But it can’t simply be something that is insulting or might make the officer angry. For example, as The Marshall Project points out, calling an officer an “a--hole” has been found by multiple courts not to be “fighting words.” Flipping the Bird is Not a Crime Of course, words aren’t the only way we can express our displeasure with someone else. Courts have also recognized that “flipping the bird” at police officers is protected speech that cannot be the basis of an arrest for disorderly conduct, breach of the peace, or similar offenses. As citizens, we have the right under the Constitution to express ourselves to police officers, including doing so angrily, loudly, and critically. While properly trained police should have an understanding of this right, the reality is that many people will continue to be wrongfully arrested simply for bruising an officer’s ego. If you have questions or concerns about your treatment by police, please give us a call.
With the articles and past research that I have collected, studies tell us that less than 3 percent of police-citizen contacts involve the threat of physical force by the police. The percentages are higher when the level of force is below lethal force, for instance 20 percent of arrests may involve some type of special or needed force to obtain and control the suspect in able to put him in custody. In the academy, police officers are taught to use equal or greater force to subdue the suspect and do what is necessary to protect the public and also look out for officer safety. Most incidents of force are low level applications such as using the arms, hands, legs, or their bodies to gain control of the suspect. Every police officer is supposed to be trained to a certain standard, and should be able to use the correct amount of force for the situation at hand. Police officers have situational training in the academy on what level of force to use if necessary. All police officers are equipped to handle most if not all situations or levels of force that is need to
Racial profiling in the dictionary is “the assumption of criminality among ethnic groups: the alleged policy of some police to attribute criminal intentions to members of some ethnic groups and to stop and question them in disproportionate numbers without probable cause (“Racial Profiling”).” In other words racial profiling is making assumptions that certain individuals are more likely to be involved in misconduct or criminal activity based on that individual’s race or ethnicity. Racial profiling propels a brutalizing message to citizens of the United States that they are pre-judged by the color of their skin rather than who they are and this then leads to assumptions of ruthlessness inside the American criminal justice system. With race-based assumptions in the law enforcement system a “lose-lose” situation is created due to America’s diverse democracy and destroys the ability to keep the criminal justice system just and fair. Although most police officers perform their duties with fairness, honor, and dedication, the few officers who portray to be biased then harm the whole justice system resulting in the general public stereotyping every law enforcement officer as a racial profiler (Fact Sheet Racial Profiling). When thinking about racial profiling many people automatically think it happens only to blacks but sadly this is mistaken for far more ethnic groups and races such as Jews, Muslims, Mexicans, Native Americans, and many more are racially profiled on a day to day basis. Many people believe racial profiling to be a myth because they see it as police officers merely taking precautions of preventing a crime before it happens, but in reality racial profiling has just become an approved term for discrimination and unjust actio...
The Fourth Amendment states “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Despite this right, multiple minorities across the country suffer at the hands of police officers through racial profiling; the singling out of a person or persons as the main suspect of a crime based on their race. Many people have also suffered the loss of a loved one because police believed the suspect to be a threat based on their races therefore the officers use their authority to take out the “threat”. Although racial profiling may make sense to police officers in the line of duty, through the eyes of the public and those affected by police actions, it is a form a racism that is not being confronted and is allowing unjust convictions and deaths.
Over the past centuries, Black community in Toronto have encountered and persisted violence and discriminations in many different ways. Racial profiling and carding are the two major roots of police brutality. Police officers often have biased perceptions and negative feelings about certain races. Carding can be defined as random police checks that target young African-Canadian men. Police might detain a driver for driving a specific type of vehicle or driving in certain areas that they have assumptions about. “This practice was a systematic violation of the rights of people in our communities, especially of racialized youth” (CBC ABC National, June 1, 2015). Carding results in police abusing their power which leads to assaults, shootings and death. However, police have said
Police brutality is a civil rights violation that occurs when a police officer acts with excessive force by using an amount of force with regards to a civilian that is more than necessary. Excessive force by law enforcement officers is a violation of a person's rights. Excessive force is not subject to a precise definition, but it is generally beyond the force a reasonable and prudent law enforcement officer would use under the circumstances (“Police Brutality Law & Legal Definition”,2013).
To maintain this image, rules and codes of ethics within the police force should be maintained at all possible times. If police are using brutality to resolve issues, it doesn't set much of an example of dispute resolution between individuals. Over the past decade, police abuse remains one of the most serious human rights violations in the United States. Police officers are trusted and expected to respect society as a whole and enforce the law. There is a time a place for aggressive force if needed, apprehending a suspect, however the environment and situation might influence the moment thus resulting in the brutal and barbaric behavior from the cop.
Background and Audience Relevance: According to the Human Rights Watch 2012 report on Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States; police brutality has become one the most serious human rights violation. As citizens of the United States it is our duty to make sure that those with authority don 't take advantage of their power.
In the Ferguson article (2015), there was an example given about an African American man claimed that he was standing outside of of Wal-Mart, an officer called him a “stupid motherf****r” and a “bastard.” According to the man, a lieutenant was on the scene and did nothing to reproach the officer, instead threatening to arrest the man (p. 80). This demonstrates that the police in Ferguson had no respect for the civilian and even though the lieutenant was present, they did nothing. The officer was not suspended nor held responsible for this incident. By failing to hold officers accountable, it sends a message that officers can behave as they like, “regardless of law or policy, and even if caught, that punishment will be light.” (Ferguson, 86). This message serves to excuse officer wrongdoing and heighten community distrust. This is also to say that police can possibly get away with murder because they are higher officials and work for the
The first thing that needs to be understood is that police at times have to use some type of force or authority to subdue suspects. Its something the people trust in police officers and its something we need to understand. What exactly is excessive force. That’s the problem there is not a clear definition of it. As stated by ABC news “Excessive force is a slippery metaphor: experts say it’s any force beyond what’s necessary to arrest a suspect and keep police and bystanders safe.There are some moves, like choke holds, that are altogether barred in certain jurisdictions” (Segan,
Have you ever been followed by store officials or security while shopping in a department store? At first, all of the attention can be flattering but quickly becomes insulting once you realize they’re not following you to offer any assistance. Instead because of how you look you fit a certain profile that causes store officials to think you’ve come to their store to steal. This type of behavior is called racial profiling. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, racial profiling refers to the discrimination practice by law enforcement officials of targeting individuals for suspicion of crime based on the individual’s race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. Citizens need to be more aware of racial profiling and make laws that racial profiling should be illegal. Racial profiling is carried out by law enforcement airport security, and other security personnel that look to profile the minorities for no reason. Heather Sally Newton Driscoll ebscohost.com stated “The practice of profiling is rooted in centuries of discrimination and is based on stereotypes that have long been disproved. Profiling holds on entire population accountable for the committed by a small minority”.
“It was so hostile. I was so confused. It was happening so fast that I could easily see how this situation could get out of hand very quickly. I didn’t feel safe as all. But one officer stopped his questioning and said, ‘we may not let you go’.” (Perry) This is a quote from famous producer Tyler Perry, talking about his experience being stopped by two white police officers in Atlanta. Police officers are among the most trusted men and women in American society, they should be anyway. However, in some cities and states the trust between officers and people of a racial minority, such as Africans, Latinos and Arabs, has been tainted by mistreatment of policing powers. Some officers are stopping, searching, or pulling people of these races over and breaking the code they stand for by disrespecting the citizen, most of whom are completely innocent. This is not only morally unacceptable, but also completely unconstitutional and needs to stop promptly. With proper legislative action this injustice can and will be righted!
A hate crime is a crime motivated by several reasons that include religion, sexual orientation, race, nationality, gender etc. It typically involves physical violence, intimidation, threats and other means against the individual that is being targeted. It is a crime against the person and it can have a devastating impact on the victim. Several argue that hate crimes should be punished more severely. However, it is not a crime to hate someone or something if it does not lead to some sort of criminal offense.
Police officers primary responsibility is to protect and serve citizens and communities, not to abuse the laws by hurting innocent people. In most states Stand-Your-Ground laws allows innocent citizens the right to use deadly force to defend and protect themselves. But what if they were protecting themselves from police brutality. Police brutality has been going on for many years; they can cause riots, injuries, and even mistrust for the police.
were to argue with a police officer, for example, the same way he did with the
Communication in social environments is necessary for police officers because they have to make fast decisions about interacting with victims, witnesses, and suspects. Specifically, the better communication that the officers ...