Monday, September 15, 2008

New Possible FBI Rules


The U.S. Justice Department unveiled proposed new rules on Friday for FBI investigations, changes a civil liberties group criticized for giving agents powers to investigate Americans without proper suspicion.


In its first major change in years, the Justice Department proposed a consolidated set of guidelines for domestic FBI operations, seeking to apply the same rules for criminal and terrorism cases, and for collecting foreign intelligence.


The guidelines were first adopted in the 1970s following disclosures that the FBI under J. Edgar Hoover had run a widespread domestic surveillance program that spied on civil rights activists and political opponents.


Officials said the new guidelines, which total 45 pages, were still being revised after consultations with Congress and civil liberties groups. The new rules are expected to take effect on October 1.
Justice Department and FBI officials told a news briefing the changes would allow agents in some terrorism cases to use informants, do physical surveillance and conduct interviews without identifying themselves or their true purpose.


They said such techniques currently could be used in ordinary criminal cases, but not for those involving national security, before an investigation has begun.


The American Civil Liberties Union expressed concern the rewritten rules had been drafted in a way to allow the FBI to begin surveillance without factual evidence to back it up.


It said that under the new guidelines, a person's race or ethnic background could be used as a factor in opening an investigation, a move the ACLU believes will institute racial profiling as a matter of policy.


ACLU Washington legislative director Caroline Fredrickson said, "Agents will be given unparalleled leeway to investigate Americans without proper suspicion, and that will inevitably result in constitutional violations."


Anthony Romero, the ACLU's executive director, said, "Issuing guidelines that permit racial profiling the day after the 9/11 anniversary and in the midst of a historic presidential campaign is typical Bush administration stagecraft designed to exploit legitimate security concerns for partisan political purposes."


Department officials said the guidelines would not allow an investigation based solely on a person's race or religion. "We are not changing our basic approach when race, religion or ethnicity may be taken into consideration," said one official who declined to be identified.


"The Department of Justice has long been concerned about the use of race or ethnicity in investigations. But it is simply not responsible to say that race may never be taken into account when conducting an investigation," spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said in a statement after the briefing.


So do you think that racial profiling in criminal & terrorist investigations is okay?

15 comments:

Mackenzie said...

I really don't think that racial profiling is okay at all. Just because someone believes in something that others believe in that doesn't mean that that person would do something horrible. A lot of influence on decisions come from family. So therefore it might not be a religion or a race but family influence.

katiehaukos04 said...

I believe that racial profiling is the wrong way to approach any investigation. The race of the person has very little done with their morals, and they don't need to be discriminated. Yes, there have been crimes linked towards one racial group or another, but racial discrimination does not need to happen in federal cases. It is not the fault of the one person who has never broke the law once in their life to be searched at the airport because they look like the terrorists.
Every race has had people who committed lethal crimes, so why pick out the few Muslims or African Americans because their race is the one with the track record. It just doesn't make sense.
Starting an investigation on a person based on their outward appearance is morally wrong, and should not be done by the FBI.

jakelabrec7 said...

i dont think racial profiling is ok in any investigation or in any way. i think that they should have to have the facts and have a just cause before they are aloud to investigate.why blame an entire race for something that a few did?
so i think that in this new law they shouldnt have the right to just openly start and investigation on someone due to there race or religion they should have to have permission from someone like how police officers have to get warrants.

chriszias 3 said...

I don't think racial profiling is okay, but we as a country are far from it stopping. Yes we passed bills and laws to make racial profiling illegal but people still do it. That is wrong. It shouldn't matter if they believe in different things thats why they came to America. At least they are doing something to stop it but I think racial profiling is still going to be around because you will have those few people who like being rascists.

cindymedina-3 said...

I believe that racial profiling is the wrong way to approach this situation. It is not fair to soley judge, classify, stereotype, generalize people in any way due to their physical appearace. Their exterrior can not tell us what kind of a person they are, what morals they hold valuable, etc. It is not just to judge based on race/physical appearance just because of something bad someone of the same race as you may have done. All racial profiling can bring us is racism, discrimination, and hate for our country. Instead of progressing forward by giving everyone a fair chance based of what is on the inside, we will just degenerate in many ways. We should stop and ask ourselves, is this what we really want for our country and our people.

shababsiddiqui4 said...

As a person who is born an American, but has received the airport security "wand treatment" and has been sent to the "randomly selected for further searches" line far too many times, it's a real wonder why I would be against racial profiling. While before it was just a common trend, this new legislation would give legitimate permission to continue and escalate the situation. Instead of easing tensions and giving Americans confidence in their security, racial profiling creates more paranoia among everyone. If you see a brown-skinned man with a funky last name being pulled aside at airport security over and over again, then even you will be forced to believe something is wrong with him. This new legislation would only be planting weeds in a grass field, when we already have enough weeds to worry about.

komalparikh1 said...

Racial profiling isn't an appropriate approach to investigations. Just because one apple in the batch is ruined, that doesn't mean all of them are ruined. America is all about equality so why be bias towards certain races? If racism didn't exist our world would be ideal, which isn't possible, but I don't think it should be prominant at the FBI level by initiating investigations off of racial profiling.

Caitlan Marie said...

It is true that many people in the U.S. are willing to judge a person based on the color of their skin or their religious preference. It is also true that much of America's security system is willing to link race/ethnic background with crime (especially after September 11 and a continuing surge of illegal immigrants). Just because the government says racial profiling is okay for U.S. security, that doesn't mean that it is right morally. Security personnel should instead check the criminal history or violence background of someone before jumping to stereotypical conclusions.

catwiechmann2 said...

I think that racial profiling is wrong. They shouldn't just asume that someone is a terrorist just by the color of their skin. So are they expecting the terrorist to be brown, because I'm part brown and I'm not a terrorist. There could be a terrorist that's white and walking the streets ready to blow up something and the FBI wouldn't even of suspected him. If they are going to have racial profiling they better have more information then their skin color.

samanthapiercy1 said...

I don't think that racial profiling is the right way to handle investigations. I think it is completely naive to assume that just because someone looks like a terrorist, they actually are one. It isn't fair to put preconceived notions on someone just becuase of the color of their skin.

OscarGuerrero_per1 said...

I dont think that racial profiling by the FBI is the right way to go about a investigation. Accusing a person of wrong doing due to the nature of their ethnic background isnt constitutional. Of course after 9/11 our security measures have increased, but not to the point where racial discrimination needs to take place. Our country has come a long way from having slaves and granting civil rights to all, so the government can once again establish laws that are taking effect on Muslims, African Americans, Mexicans, South and Central Americans, and others being profiled.

Ashley said...

Let me first say that in an ideal world we would all have to wear rose colored glasses blotting out the color of skin. But this isn't fantasy land. Racial profiling isn't necessary, but sadly it has become a primary source of judgement. We can kick and scream and exhaust all sources in order to elemenate racial profiling but because of certain people's fears it will never fully be removed.

And while on the subject of racial profiling, why not spend even more tax dollars on eye color profiling? Hey, it makes sense!

eliseodeleon1 said...

I don't think that racial profing in criminal and terrorist investigations is okay. Many people always say that the U.S. is the country of racial equality and civil liberties. If what they say is true then why is racial profiling being proposed in our justice system. These proposed new rules by the U.S. Justice Departmeny just go show how racial stereotypes still exist in our country. Even though racial profiling might not ever be removed from the world, we should at least be taking steps forward in lessening it. People's race and ethnic background shouldn't be used as a factor to put them under suspicion for a crime. Even in the real world, people's race or ethnicity shouldn't be used to suspect certain things about them even thought sometimes it is.

Tyler Schovanec2 said...

I think racial profiling is wrong. After 9/11, if an Arabic looking man try's to get on a plane everyone suspects that he is a terrorist. However, there is basis for this conclusion since statistically he is more likely to be. I don't mean to sound racist but i can understand why security folks do what they do.

On the other hand, I believe there are much better ways to go about an investigation. Just because a person is a certain color or religion doesn't mean he is a criminal. I think that it is wrong that these people are tagged with unjust immoral values solely because of their skin tone. More criminals come from family influence or lack of an income or their high ambitions for a certain cause.

Anonymous said...

I do not think that racial profiling is the way to investigate a group of people or even just one person. However, it does seem to be the way it happens at times. Just because a particular race in general is thought of as having a record for crimes doesn't mean that everyone that is a part of that race has that kind of record. There is someone from every race has committed a crime so it shouldn't be that a person is investigated for "looking like a terrorist."