...and when I say it doesn't work, I mean it does...
I know some of you already know this, and forgive me if I talk down to you.

[b]How profiling DOES work[/b]
Profiling exploits statistics to [i]divine[/i] characteristics about an individual.

For example, consider the following statistic:
100% of Catholics are Christian.

Therefore, if we select a random Catholic, we can reasonably say that person is also Christian.

(for math majors: Catholic => Christian)

[b]How Profiling DOES NOT work[/b]
Misuses of profiling happen because people (known as idiots) misread the statistics. Consider the following two statements. They mean COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things.
[b]A[/b]. 100% of Catholics are Christian.
[b]B[/b]. 100% of Christians are Catholic.

Idiots think that simply because statement [b]A[/b] is true, then statement [b]B[/b] must also be true. Those idiots are wrong.
Actually, statement [b]A[/b] is true, and statement [b]B[/b] is false. Only about 30% of Christians are Catholic.

If you don't understand this concept, then draw a venn diagram on paper.

We can call this an "implication fallacy", because [i]"Catholic implies Christian"[/i] does not mean the same as [i]"Christian implies Catholic"[/i].

When profiling, you must make sure that your subject is the same as the subject of the statistics. Let's try an exersise. Highlight to see the answer.

Fact: 70% of death-row inmates are men.
Statement: Most men are on death-row. [color=white]False[/color]

Fact: 90% of blacks vote Democrat.
Statement: That black guy is probably a Democrat. [color=white]true[/color]

Fact: Most abortion clinic bombings are perpetrated by Catholics.
Statement: Catholics bomb clinics often. [color=white]False[/color]

[b]Why profiling is bad (when misused)[/b]
Have you ever considered why most drug criminals are black males between the ages of 15 and 30? Do you think that black men do more drugs than white men?

There are more black criminals because black men are searched more often. Black men are search more often because there are more black criminals.

This happens because of the implication fallacy.
[i]"Criminal => black"[/i] is not the same as [i]"black => criminal"[/i].

The fallacy also reinforces itself. It causes black men to be caught more often than whites, which increases the amount of suspicion they get.

These types of fallacies also apply to domestic disputes (men get charged), luggage searches, and are used to create stereotypes.

[b]Why profiling is bad Part Duex (when used correctly)[/b]
Good news everybody! I remembered the part that I left out!

Even when profiling is used correctly, it can cause massive problems and oppression. This occurs with preventative measures are taken based on the statistics.

Let's pretend for a moment that there is an implication between membership in the ALF (Animal Liberation Front) and suicide bombing animal research facilities. Let's also say that this implication is completely legitimate and is not based on any fallacies.

Based on these statistics, we take preventative measures by forbidding ALF members from going into research buildings. Pretend the law is completely effective. The problem is that this law is so effective that it prevents new statistics from being collected.

Twenty years later, the law is still in effect [i]because no new statistics have been gathered[/i]. The law will never change because the statistics will never change.

During this time, the ALF's goals will change, their leadership will change, but the oppressive statistics used against them are fixed forever.

These oppressive laws ignore broad social changes. They are especially dangerous when used against an unorganized group (with no defined leadership) like a racial group or nationality, because it may be harder to tell when the group's disposition has changed.

[b]Why people should not profile[/b]
Because they don't know how to use it right. But now you do -- so use it correctly.

[size=1]I think there was something else I wanted to say, but I don't remember. I may add something later.[/size]