Bush`s Racial Profiling Guidelines Could Be Worse – And May Well Be

How bad are the new Bush Administration`s racial

for federal agencies?

Well, we should be thankful for whatever sensible
policies on race we can get from

this Administration.
So let`s call the glass a
little bit full – the guidelines could be worse.

They ban "stereotyping" of blacks and Hispanics
(i.e., realism), but they don`t seem directly to impose
racial quotas for stops and searches by federal law
enforcement officials – i.e. as many whites etc. as
blacks would have to be searched. (Don`t laugh – this
was a real possibility.)

But remember, we`ve wound up with quotas

without anybody originally specifying them.
So we shall see.

The good news: the Bush guidelines actually include
exemptions for anti-terrorism work. Roger Clegg in
National Review Online

over this distinction (racial profiling
against crime—bad; racial profiling against terrorism—good)
as simple common sense. It causes him to describe the
Bush policy as “perfect, A+, 100 percent.”

This says more about

National Review`s
new, Beltway
priorities than about
the Bush guidelines. Over the last decade, about sixty
times more Americans have died from normal crime than
from terrorism.

And the fact remains that all this racial profiling
hysteria is bunk.  I got racially profiled a lot last
month by the U.S. Border Patrol. And I liked it.

I spent a few days hanging around the Arizona-Mexico
border, talking to

Border Patrol
guards, and crossing into Mexico and
back. Each time I ran into a federal agent, they`d
initially be suspicious. But then they`d quickly turn
friendly and helpful as my traits—6`-4" tall, blue-gray
eyes, light brown hair, no accent—clicked into place
against the profiles they

carry in their heads
, and the answer came up: He`s
almost certainly an American citizen.

They knew then they had

better things
to do with their limited time than
hassle me.

Granted, there are Mexican nationals who

rather like me—for example, President Vicente
Fox is

even taller
than I am. But those guys aren`t trying
to sneak into America. They like it just fine in
Mexico because they, essentially,

own it.

In contrast, at the Tucson airport the

Transportation Security Administration
put me
through the usual wringer to make sure I wasn`t an Al-Qaeda

The airlines are going bankrupt as Americans
increasingly decide that
air travel
isn`t worth the

. But at least TSA isn`t racially


ritual horror
that greets the term "racial
profiling" these days is actually testimony to the
impressive progress in controlling crime since the
anarchic early 1990s.

to the FBI, the number of homicides in
America fell from 24,700 in 1991 to 15,517 in 2000.
That`s over 9,000 lives saved – or the equivalent of
three 9-11`s that don`t happen each year. There are a
lot of reasons for this, but aggressive Giuliani-style
policing that has put a huge number more bad guys

behind bars
is a big one.

Now that crime is down, however, our elites feel they
can afford the luxury of

against "racial profiling."

But there are still five 9-11`s worth of people being
murdered each year. And that could easily go back up to
the pre-crackdown rate if the cops are constrained.

Simply put, the police can use either of two
alternative strategies:

They can sit around eating donuts and

for bad guys to commit crimes.

Or they can get in the face of potential bad guys and


To do the latter, though, they have to use the brains
God gave them to figure out who is more likely to
cause trouble

And that`s when they get blamed for profiling.

The simple truth is that sex, age, and, yes,
race/ethnicity all are closely correlated with a
propensity to break the law. Today, it`s not too
controversial to point out that males and the young are
more murderous. But the enormous race difference is
heavily censored
. According to the

U.S. Department of Justice:

"Based on data for the
years 1976-2000:

"Blacks are
disproportionately represented as both homicide victims
and offenders. In terms of rates per 100,000, blacks are
six times more likely to be victimized and about eight
times more likely to commit homicide than are whites.

"Males represent
three-quarters of homicide victims and nearly ninety
percent of offenders. In terms of rates per 100,000,
males are three times more likely to be killed, and
almost eight times more likely to commit homicide than
are females.

"Approximately one-third
of murder victims and almost half the offenders are
under the age of 25. For both victims and offenders, the
rate per 100,000 peaks in the 18-24 year-old age group."

In other words, for homicides, the racial ratio is
just as large (8X) as the sex ratio, and race seems more
important than age.

In fact, race gap is actually a little worse than
that. Government numbers lump almost all Hispanics in
with whites. So the ratio of blacks to non-Hispanic
whites is even higher. A liberal advocacy group recently
extracted the Hispanics from the data and came up with

ratios for imprisonment

  • Blacks vs. non-Hispanic whites:

  • Hispanics vs. non-Hispanic
    whites: 3.7X

They didn`t report the Asians vs. non-Hispanic whites
ratio, but it would be well under 1.0X.

American intellectual discourse has become so
corrupted, however, that even mentioning these
statistics is seen as racist. So the

over racial profiling largely ignores the
central reality of racial differences in propensity to
commit crimes.

And a debate that is based on lies can come to no
good end.

Ironically, Bush campaigned in 2000

racial profiling – specifically against the
profiling of Muslims and Arabs by airport check-in

Of course, this was because Karl Rove, certified

, told him to. It was another one of Rove`s

minority outreach
plans – this one in alliance with
long time GOP lobbyist

Grover Norquist

Does the terrorist exemption in the new racial
profiling guidelines mean the

White House
has given up on the Rove-Norquist

Muslim strategy?

If so, I shudder to think what it would take the
Administration to learn about the folly of the
Rove-Hispanic strategy.

[Steve Sailer [email
him] is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and

movie critic

The American Conservative
His website

features his daily