Profiling

The dilemma of profiling is an ongoing problem. The IRS uses it on a regular basis in determining who should be audited and it is an accepted practice. If a mayor finds out that 50% of the crime is occurring in 25% of the city and sends in extra police to that area and that results in a disproportional number of arrest he is open to criticism. This is a type of profiling. Assume a city is plagued with a drug problem and the police chief decides to do something about it. He doesn't have unlimited resource but he doesn't want to use profiling. He decides he will randomly stop traffic and check for drugs. He cannot stop all cars and that would be too disruptive. He tells his deputy to go down the road and select every fifth car and notify him as to which car to stop. The deputy see five cars go by. The first is a Volkswagon with two nuns, the second is Lincoln town car with Grandma and Grandpa, the third is Van with a family, the forth is a sedan with a priest and the fifth is a Black guy wearing a gold chain driving and Mercedes. Now you are the deputy. What do you do. While this seems an absurd example this very thing happens at airport where the TSA is told to check every fifth person and there are examples of checking elderly women in wheel chairs. Suppose you were sent to Heathrow Airport in London to check for possible terrorist. As the people come off the planes would you concentrate on the blond females from Scandinavia or the brown skinned males from the Middle East. Stop and frisk is a very controversial example. Statistics show that if you stop Black males rather than random stops you will find many more weapons per given number of stops. Should you sacrifice efficiency to avoid profiling.