solved Students must provide a critical review of the questions, topics

Students must provide a critical review of the questions, topics and issues posed and substantively reply to the contributions of at least three peers. Individual postings should include a full discussion of the content of the question posed and explain how it relates to the concepts in the weekly text readings and other resources. The postings should be analytic in nature and include comparisons/contrasts, and examples that can bolster your point. The Discussion is for your benefit and it is important to respond to the discussion topic and to engage others in a running dialogue.Your initial post should be 250 words. You should then respond to 3 or more posts 250 words each. This can be accomplished by:• Validating with additional evidence from the literature.• Posing a thoughtful question with a commentary which generates further discussion.• Providing an alternative point-of-view, with evidence and examples.• Offering additional insight into how the concept might be understood, with evidence provided with real world examples.Profiling and the Whren decision Question: Is racial profiling a common practice? Why or why not? Explain the arguments for and against it? What if any impact does the Supreme Court’s decision in Whren v. United States have on racial profiling? Support your position.Classmate 1 Marshae: Racial Profiling is still a huge issue today and is in the media daily. It refers to the discriminatory practice by law enforcement that targets individuals for crime based off their race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. [1] Racial profiling is used commonly by law enforcement is by using race to determine which drivers to stop for minor traffic violations. In some states, this is called ‘driving while black or brown.” This is not just used for traffic violations though, law enforcement also uses it to determine which pedestrians to search for contraband. The problem with all of this is our Constitution provides us protections against illegal search and seizures as well as fair treatment and equal opportunity protections.In 2011, at a Leadership Conference on Civil Rights it was found that while law enforcement uses Racial Profiling to stop and search more African Americans and Hispanics than Caucasians, more contraband is usually found on the Caucasians. I think even in society the white Caucasian people have it in their mind that they won’t get caught because law enforcement is not looking for them, they are looking for another race. [2] In 1995, Jonny Gammage, a 31 year old African American male was killed after being pulled while he was already on the ground. The officers were later tried, and their charges were dismissed. [3]Twenty years ago, The Supreme Court basically legalized racial profiling of drivers by police in Whren v. United States. In the case the plaintiffs argued the search in question came from a pretextual stop, which violated their Fourth Amendment of an unreasonable search. A pretextual stop, is a stop used by law enforcement which is usually a minor violation like a license plate light or not using turn signals. This gives the officer a way to investigate the vehicle and the occupants inside the vehicle for any wrongdoing. It was found in Whren v. United States that as long as the officer stopped the vehicle for a wrongdoing then the stop is legal and does not violate the Fourth Amendment. It has been found that with these stops and questions that arise during the stop, people begin to be resentful. [4] I do not agree with racial profiling. In today’s society it is happening more and more to African Americans. Some of those who have been a victim are George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Sandra Bland, Tamir Rice and many more. I believe that our country has came a long way with civil rights, but I also believe that we still have a long way to go. I don’t know if we will ever beat the racial profiling and pulling people over because of their race, or judging people based off their race, but we need to.Classmate 2 Diane: In South Dakota, the community you are from correlates with your license plate. I am from an area that is in constant struggles with the surrounding white communities as we are a predominantly Native American community. Knowing that, I also have an understanding of racial profiling as I have had several run ins with law enforcement over this. When we have road blocks set up for “DUI checks” I am aware they also ask for insurance and registration, as many people on the reservation drive without license, insurance or registration. I am happy to provide the necessary papers as well as answer their questions as to where I have been and what I have/haven’t drank. I view this profiling as important to their job as well as my safety. Another instance was when my daughter was pulled over for a simple violation (a rear light was out). The officer made a comment that she was “from the rez” and proceeded to ask her to get out of her car and had her car searched. Luckily, we had educated her on her rights and law enforcement duties. She cooperated, let them search her car as she knew she was not breaking any laws, took her warning, was polite, got in her vehicle and drove to school. This could have ended very differently based on her behavior. Was the stop warranted? Yes. Was his comment necessary? Absolutely not. Did she let his lack of professionalism influence her cooperation? Nope.I believe racial profiling is common practice for all people, not just law enforcement. I believe we judge others, whether we mean to or not, based on our upbringing, the community we were raised in as well as past experiences. I also believe racial profiling, and racism itself, does not just go white towards black. In law enforcement, racial profiling has long been occurring and education/training is a place to start to stop the behavior. The Traffic Stops Statistics Act of 1997, H.R. 118, was initiated to try to educate and stop the high number of traffic stops that occurred to nonwhite drivers. While it did not pass, it was a start to important discussions and investigating racial profiling. The Sanford Open Policing Project found that across the United States, black drivers were 20 percent more likely to be pulled over and 1.5 to 2 times more likely to be searched. One interesting note is that after dark, when race could not be as easily noted, there was only a 5-10 percent drop in black drivers being pulled over (Bennett, 2020). I would have thought if the officer could not see race, the 20 percent increase would be eliminated. Is there a difference between racial profiling and behavior profiling? I think this difference may sometimes be very narrow, but it definitely does exist. In Whren v. U.S. were the officers profiling against color or against location and behavior? A study by the U.S Custom’s support the benefit of behavioral profiling over racial profiling. When they stopped suspecting on the basis of color and started using behavior instead, they were more than 300 percent more effective in their searches (Nittle, 2018). Another thing to consider, is racial profiling all law enforcement? Do people call and report crimes or suspicion based on race? Look at how Muslims and Arabs were discriminated and attacked after 9/11 simply because of their race. While studies do show an injustice towards non-white suspects, I think the behavior starts well before the Police Academy. I feel we need to be teaching behavior profiling more, even from a young age. Teach our children not to judge on race, religion, gender, etc., but how to look for behavior that is unacceptable.I am confused as to why Whren v. United States would constitute racial profiling. If they were in a high drug use community, I would be inclined to say they were profiling potential drug dealers/behavior, but those could be people of any color. They were originally pulled over for a traffic violation that they admitted to. The Supreme Court held that if pulled over for a traffic violation that another police officer would acknowledge, and from there reasonable cause to search a vehicle produces evidence of another crime, the evidence is admissible (Wren v. U.S., 1996). This ruling was important as it provides officers with the backing they need to be able to complete their jobs when evidence is leaning towards a criminal activity. Bottom line, if you are hiding illegal activity, do not commit a second questionable act to get caught in the process of the first crime!References:Bennett, J. (2020, May 5). Research Shows Black Drivers More Likely to Be Stopped by Police. Educationand Social Sciences. https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may/black-drivers-more-likely-to-be-stopped-by-police.html.Nittle, N. (2018, July 22). Racial Profiling: Ineffective and Amoral. ThoughtCo.https://www.thoughtco.com/the-case-against-racial-profiling-2834830.Whren v. United States – 517 U.S. 806, 116 S. Ct. 1769 (1996)Classmate 3 Ivan: Racial Profiling is still a huge issue today and it shows, as George Floyd case and the $27 million dollars settlement still a hot topic on the media. Racial Profiling refers to the discriminatory practice that targets individuals for crime based off their race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. This type of behavior has increased in the last few years with multiple instances of police brutality or negligence against black people. It is unfortunate, but racial profiling remains with us.This behavior is not only used for traffic violations, but to search for contraband. This conduct is illegal because the U.S. Constitution provides us protections against illegal searches and seizures. It is worth mentioning that many police departments have made efforts to mitigate racial profiling by increasing their training. In addition, some departments have taken a step forward collecting data on all traffic stops, stops and frisks, and other routine police practices to prevent this behavior (Harris, 2020). What I understand from Whren v. United States is that the Supreme Court basically allowed the pretextual traffic stops even if the driver complaint of racial profiling. This is permissible if the government can articulate reasonable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. In the case, the plaintiffs argued the search in question came from a pretextual stop, therefore violating his Fourth Amendment right against an unreasonable search. A pretextual traffic stop involves a police officer stopping a driver for a traffic violation, minor or otherwise, to allow the officer to then investigate a different or unrelated, suspected offense (Oyez.org, 2021). There are different points of view over this issue, the reality is that jut like the criminal tactics evolve the criminal justice needs to do the same to stay effective. I am not saying that racial profiling is ok (is not), but just like in some instances is permissible to “lie” in interrogatories, it could also be effective to a certain point. The pretextual stop gives the officer leverage to investigate the vehicle and the occupants inside the vehicle for any wrongdoing (Oyez.org, 2021). As mentioned before, profiling is not OK, but it can prevent multiple situations (Ex. robberies, murders, kidnapped, among others). The Fourth Amendment protects our rights against unreasonable search and seizures, but there are more pros than cons in a pretextual stop (Oyez.org, 2021). All this encompasses criminal justice reform and keep up with the evolving times. I believe that if probable cause is present, is justified. In my opinion, if I must waive or flex some of my rights to be safer, (Ex. taking offenders off the streets) I would. Harris, D.A. (2020). Racial Profiling: Past, Present, and Future? Retrieved March 12, 2021, from https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/publications/criminal-justice-magazine/2020/winter/racial-profiling-past-present-and-future/.Oyez.org. (2021). Whren v. United States. Retrieved March 12, 2021, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1995/95-5841.