The practice of police "profiling" is not a new phenomenon to any of us. FBI Uniform Crime Reports data show that 63% of drug arrests in New Jersey were of minorities. Nationwide, the most recent FBI data show that 30% of those arrested for "serious" crimes were black, as were 41% of those arrested for violent crimes and 56% for murder”. (Schlessinger, 2003)
The high numbers of blacks arrested are partially the result of police targeting them in the first place. Are black Americans more likely to commit crimes, or are their higher arrest rates a function of discriminatory police profiling?
A Survey of Substance and Drug Abuse finds that nearly the same proportion of blacks and whites say that they use illegal substances--roughly 12-13% for both groups. Yet, 37% of those arrested for drug-related crimes such as trafficking or possession are black”. (Olshaker, 2000)
Are differential arrest results the outcome of more intensive police attention to blacks rather than their greater involvement in crime? For homicides, the FBI keeps supplemental statistics providing data on the age, sex, and race of perpetrators and victims. These data show that 37% of murderers are black, 31% are white, and 32% are of "unknown" or "other" racial origin.
For crimes committed by a single individual whose race can be identified by the victim, 25% of perpetrators are black. For robbery, the figure climbs to 51%. These figures have held fairly constant for many years. Meanwhile, blacks make up over 48% of murder victims.
The causes of crime are complicated and cannot be reduced to skin color. Yet, the statistical instrument used in profiling is attuned to a small set of very general criteria presumed to indicate criminal likelihood-race, sex, and age (as well as factors such as time of day, type and....
