Another Alleged Racial Profiling Incident in Davis

While most of us were enjoying our Christmas holiday, David Johnson was pulled over by the Davis police department yet again. It was the second time in two months and over 10 times in the last two years alone.

He was driving his vehicle south bound on Poleline Road towards Safeway when he saw an officer driving north bound, the officer spotted his vehicle, made a u-turn, and eventually pulled over Johnson. The reason given for the traffic stop was a loud muffler. Johnson received a fix-it ticket and was allowed to go about his way.

Did Mr. Johnson have a loud muffler? Yes he did.

Was it likely that a police officer with his window rolled up several car lengths away could hear it? No it wasn’t.

The video clip that you are about to watch focuses on a specific portion of the incident. Mr. Johnson asked for the Sergeant on duty to come talk to him. Johnson very asks about two very important factors.

First, his previous ticket was an obstructed rear license plate. Johnson had been pulled over by Officer Beasley in this incident. However, the CHP had signed off on the license plate being legal. Johnson asks the Sergeant in this incident if his license plate was obstructed. The Sergeant explains that he wasn’t there at the time and didn’t see the what officer saw and that moreover, some officers specialize in different areas of the law than other officers.

The Sergeant never did answer Mr. Johnson’s question to whether or not he thought the license plate is obstructed.

The second and perhaps most telling part of the exchange had to do with the current vehicle violation—the loud muffler. Again, the Sergeant refuses to answer the question about whether the noise was audible through a closed window at distance. But more importantly, another vehicle drives by and they have a loud muffler as well. When Johnson asks him, the Sergeant explains that it would not be “feasible” be to pull over every car with a loud muffler and asked rhetorically if Johnson realized how few officers are on duty–four he states under his breath.

This of course begs the question—with limited resources, why is a police officer pulling over a motorist for a non-moving violation?

This gets into the heart of the charge of racial profiling. As I have become more and more familiar with these types of incidents a very clear picture is emerging. What is happening is basically a “phishing” exercise.

A police officer spots a vehicle that does not appear to belong. It may be an older vehicle in poor condition. It possibly may be the race of the driver. The more I see it is probably the vehicle more than the driver, although I’ve heard of wealthy black people pulled over on such stops.

Regardless, the police officer once identifying the vehicle, then needs a reason or pretense to stop the vehicle. Two months ago it was an obstructed license plate (and let me tell you, there was no obstruction) and on December 26, 2006 it was a loud muffler (and he did indeed have a loud muffler). Often these kind of stops they pull them over for something that did not happen and then never even write a ticket.

What they are then looking for is an outstanding warrant, drugs, weapons, or something big. So they use the traffic stop as a pretense to see if this person is a criminal and once they determine that the person is not a criminal, they treat them well and let them go.

This is a source of great frustration for members of the minority community and Mr. Johnson in particular. Unfortunately, while this video will be turned over to the Ombudsman, there is nothing on this that is a smoking gun. So all this becomes is more background information. The leadership in this city and the police department need to be proactive and change the way the department searches for criminals. Until that happens, these incidents will continue to occur and more and more people will be frustrated.

—Doug Paul Davis reporting

Author

  • David Greenwald

    Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

    View all posts

Categories:

Civil Rights

56 comments

  1. Your description of the way that these “profiling” stops are now being made demonstrates that there is an increased awareness of accountability by the Davis police. This can be taken as a partial victory for the campaign for police oversight that resulted in Mr. Aaronson’s hiring. Continual independant oversight and keeping these incidents in the spotlight of public scrutiny can be effective in at least keeping these practices in check. Davis has taken a significant step forward in this regard.. an enduring legacy of our recently fired HRC.

  2. Your description of the way that these “profiling” stops are now being made demonstrates that there is an increased awareness of accountability by the Davis police. This can be taken as a partial victory for the campaign for police oversight that resulted in Mr. Aaronson’s hiring. Continual independant oversight and keeping these incidents in the spotlight of public scrutiny can be effective in at least keeping these practices in check. Davis has taken a significant step forward in this regard.. an enduring legacy of our recently fired HRC.

  3. Your description of the way that these “profiling” stops are now being made demonstrates that there is an increased awareness of accountability by the Davis police. This can be taken as a partial victory for the campaign for police oversight that resulted in Mr. Aaronson’s hiring. Continual independant oversight and keeping these incidents in the spotlight of public scrutiny can be effective in at least keeping these practices in check. Davis has taken a significant step forward in this regard.. an enduring legacy of our recently fired HRC.

  4. Your description of the way that these “profiling” stops are now being made demonstrates that there is an increased awareness of accountability by the Davis police. This can be taken as a partial victory for the campaign for police oversight that resulted in Mr. Aaronson’s hiring. Continual independant oversight and keeping these incidents in the spotlight of public scrutiny can be effective in at least keeping these practices in check. Davis has taken a significant step forward in this regard.. an enduring legacy of our recently fired HRC.

  5. It certainly appears the DPD is picking on this guy.

    Mr. Johnson should have been given a compliment concerning the reliability of his video equipment – it seems to work every time.SAH

  6. It certainly appears the DPD is picking on this guy.

    Mr. Johnson should have been given a compliment concerning the reliability of his video equipment – it seems to work every time.SAH

  7. It certainly appears the DPD is picking on this guy.

    Mr. Johnson should have been given a compliment concerning the reliability of his video equipment – it seems to work every time.SAH

  8. It certainly appears the DPD is picking on this guy.

    Mr. Johnson should have been given a compliment concerning the reliability of his video equipment – it seems to work every time.SAH

  9. The guy who pulled him over was a newly hired police officer, he doesn’t know David Johnson. So obviously he is not intentionally picking on David Johnson. Which leads to the next question: why does this guy keep getting pulled over and how many other guys are experiencing the same thing?

  10. The guy who pulled him over was a newly hired police officer, he doesn’t know David Johnson. So obviously he is not intentionally picking on David Johnson. Which leads to the next question: why does this guy keep getting pulled over and how many other guys are experiencing the same thing?

  11. The guy who pulled him over was a newly hired police officer, he doesn’t know David Johnson. So obviously he is not intentionally picking on David Johnson. Which leads to the next question: why does this guy keep getting pulled over and how many other guys are experiencing the same thing?

  12. The guy who pulled him over was a newly hired police officer, he doesn’t know David Johnson. So obviously he is not intentionally picking on David Johnson. Which leads to the next question: why does this guy keep getting pulled over and how many other guys are experiencing the same thing?

  13. Doug, I think that the answer to your question relates to hiring practices

    I suspect that the DPD is hiring likeminded cops to make sure that racial profiling practices such as this are perpetuated

    and, of course, there is also a class element as well, the lower orders must be kept under careful surveillance to make sure that the upper middle class remains comfortable

    –Richard Estes

  14. Doug, I think that the answer to your question relates to hiring practices

    I suspect that the DPD is hiring likeminded cops to make sure that racial profiling practices such as this are perpetuated

    and, of course, there is also a class element as well, the lower orders must be kept under careful surveillance to make sure that the upper middle class remains comfortable

    –Richard Estes

  15. Doug, I think that the answer to your question relates to hiring practices

    I suspect that the DPD is hiring likeminded cops to make sure that racial profiling practices such as this are perpetuated

    and, of course, there is also a class element as well, the lower orders must be kept under careful surveillance to make sure that the upper middle class remains comfortable

    –Richard Estes

  16. Doug, I think that the answer to your question relates to hiring practices

    I suspect that the DPD is hiring likeminded cops to make sure that racial profiling practices such as this are perpetuated

    and, of course, there is also a class element as well, the lower orders must be kept under careful surveillance to make sure that the upper middle class remains comfortable

    –Richard Estes

  17. Richard:

    I don’t disagree on the hiring practices, but I also think there is an incentive structure issue here. Think about it: if you pull over a guy for a loud muffler and he turns out to be a wanted criminal, then you get rewarded. So who is more likely to be the wanted criminal?

  18. Richard:

    I don’t disagree on the hiring practices, but I also think there is an incentive structure issue here. Think about it: if you pull over a guy for a loud muffler and he turns out to be a wanted criminal, then you get rewarded. So who is more likely to be the wanted criminal?

  19. Richard:

    I don’t disagree on the hiring practices, but I also think there is an incentive structure issue here. Think about it: if you pull over a guy for a loud muffler and he turns out to be a wanted criminal, then you get rewarded. So who is more likely to be the wanted criminal?

  20. Richard:

    I don’t disagree on the hiring practices, but I also think there is an incentive structure issue here. Think about it: if you pull over a guy for a loud muffler and he turns out to be a wanted criminal, then you get rewarded. So who is more likely to be the wanted criminal?

  21. I think I read Mr. Johnson drives around in a late 90’s Ford Ranger. I do not know much about the vehicle other than the fact it probably has a bad muffler and it has a video camera. There are many late 90’s Ford Rangers – that was the best selling truck in the late 90’s. Assuming the vehicle is in reasonably good shape it is hard to imagine the type of vehicle triggered the DPD action. I wonder if the only thing differentiating this Ranger from other Davis Rangers was the appearance of the driver.

  22. I think I read Mr. Johnson drives around in a late 90’s Ford Ranger. I do not know much about the vehicle other than the fact it probably has a bad muffler and it has a video camera. There are many late 90’s Ford Rangers – that was the best selling truck in the late 90’s. Assuming the vehicle is in reasonably good shape it is hard to imagine the type of vehicle triggered the DPD action. I wonder if the only thing differentiating this Ranger from other Davis Rangers was the appearance of the driver.

  23. I think I read Mr. Johnson drives around in a late 90’s Ford Ranger. I do not know much about the vehicle other than the fact it probably has a bad muffler and it has a video camera. There are many late 90’s Ford Rangers – that was the best selling truck in the late 90’s. Assuming the vehicle is in reasonably good shape it is hard to imagine the type of vehicle triggered the DPD action. I wonder if the only thing differentiating this Ranger from other Davis Rangers was the appearance of the driver.

  24. I think I read Mr. Johnson drives around in a late 90’s Ford Ranger. I do not know much about the vehicle other than the fact it probably has a bad muffler and it has a video camera. There are many late 90’s Ford Rangers – that was the best selling truck in the late 90’s. Assuming the vehicle is in reasonably good shape it is hard to imagine the type of vehicle triggered the DPD action. I wonder if the only thing differentiating this Ranger from other Davis Rangers was the appearance of the driver.

  25. There is no proof that this was an instance of racial profiling. Clearly the author of this blog is convinced that it was, but just because he so rabidly believes his own opinion does not make it fact.

    While the title at the top of this page correctly includes the word “alleged”, all links to it elsewhere on the site clearly state the author’s opinion as a factual representation of what occured.

    The truth is all law enforcement engages in profiling as a primary method of policing. Surely one can not deny that there may have been a legitimate reason to pull this vehicle over, including the reason stated by police.

  26. There is no proof that this was an instance of racial profiling. Clearly the author of this blog is convinced that it was, but just because he so rabidly believes his own opinion does not make it fact.

    While the title at the top of this page correctly includes the word “alleged”, all links to it elsewhere on the site clearly state the author’s opinion as a factual representation of what occured.

    The truth is all law enforcement engages in profiling as a primary method of policing. Surely one can not deny that there may have been a legitimate reason to pull this vehicle over, including the reason stated by police.

  27. There is no proof that this was an instance of racial profiling. Clearly the author of this blog is convinced that it was, but just because he so rabidly believes his own opinion does not make it fact.

    While the title at the top of this page correctly includes the word “alleged”, all links to it elsewhere on the site clearly state the author’s opinion as a factual representation of what occured.

    The truth is all law enforcement engages in profiling as a primary method of policing. Surely one can not deny that there may have been a legitimate reason to pull this vehicle over, including the reason stated by police.

  28. There is no proof that this was an instance of racial profiling. Clearly the author of this blog is convinced that it was, but just because he so rabidly believes his own opinion does not make it fact.

    While the title at the top of this page correctly includes the word “alleged”, all links to it elsewhere on the site clearly state the author’s opinion as a factual representation of what occured.

    The truth is all law enforcement engages in profiling as a primary method of policing. Surely one can not deny that there may have been a legitimate reason to pull this vehicle over, including the reason stated by police.

  29. There is no proof that he was racially profiled. That’s part of the problem.

    The man in question was pulled over for a minor vehicle maintenance issue, but given their locations at the time of the stop, it seems improbable that the officer pulled him over for that reason.

    The traffic stop was suspicious in that it is part of a documented pattern of behavior and a number of individuals close to the situation are concerned about the current practices.

    Unfortunately as you suggest there is no proof and that’s part of the problem in trying to figure out how to stop these types of incidents.

  30. There is no proof that he was racially profiled. That’s part of the problem.

    The man in question was pulled over for a minor vehicle maintenance issue, but given their locations at the time of the stop, it seems improbable that the officer pulled him over for that reason.

    The traffic stop was suspicious in that it is part of a documented pattern of behavior and a number of individuals close to the situation are concerned about the current practices.

    Unfortunately as you suggest there is no proof and that’s part of the problem in trying to figure out how to stop these types of incidents.

  31. There is no proof that he was racially profiled. That’s part of the problem.

    The man in question was pulled over for a minor vehicle maintenance issue, but given their locations at the time of the stop, it seems improbable that the officer pulled him over for that reason.

    The traffic stop was suspicious in that it is part of a documented pattern of behavior and a number of individuals close to the situation are concerned about the current practices.

    Unfortunately as you suggest there is no proof and that’s part of the problem in trying to figure out how to stop these types of incidents.

  32. There is no proof that he was racially profiled. That’s part of the problem.

    The man in question was pulled over for a minor vehicle maintenance issue, but given their locations at the time of the stop, it seems improbable that the officer pulled him over for that reason.

    The traffic stop was suspicious in that it is part of a documented pattern of behavior and a number of individuals close to the situation are concerned about the current practices.

    Unfortunately as you suggest there is no proof and that’s part of the problem in trying to figure out how to stop these types of incidents.

  33. Justice for all. We will not take it. We will love you until you give it to us. We are here to stay.

    The HRC was fired and yet we have found a way to continue the communication.

    Thank you Doug Davis for the hours you put into your work.

    The Revolution will not be televised… it will be Blogged.

  34. Justice for all. We will not take it. We will love you until you give it to us. We are here to stay.

    The HRC was fired and yet we have found a way to continue the communication.

    Thank you Doug Davis for the hours you put into your work.

    The Revolution will not be televised… it will be Blogged.

  35. Justice for all. We will not take it. We will love you until you give it to us. We are here to stay.

    The HRC was fired and yet we have found a way to continue the communication.

    Thank you Doug Davis for the hours you put into your work.

    The Revolution will not be televised… it will be Blogged.

  36. Justice for all. We will not take it. We will love you until you give it to us. We are here to stay.

    The HRC was fired and yet we have found a way to continue the communication.

    Thank you Doug Davis for the hours you put into your work.

    The Revolution will not be televised… it will be Blogged.

  37. Based on my numerous conversations with a lot of people in and around law enforcement, I do not believe I am way off base here. But I’d be glad to discuss it.

  38. Based on my numerous conversations with a lot of people in and around law enforcement, I do not believe I am way off base here. But I’d be glad to discuss it.

  39. Based on my numerous conversations with a lot of people in and around law enforcement, I do not believe I am way off base here. But I’d be glad to discuss it.

  40. Based on my numerous conversations with a lot of people in and around law enforcement, I do not believe I am way off base here. But I’d be glad to discuss it.

  41. He might be “totally off on this one” but how would you know? If you have personal knowledge of the facts beyond what is shown in the video, please share them with the rest of us.

    Why is it so hard for some to accept that the police sometimes (too often) engage in racial profiling? I used to work with a Mexican-American guy in his late 20s. He drove a lowered, black, mid-70s Chevy Impala, wore his hair slicked back, a goatee, a white tee shirt, baggy black pants. He started out as a welder for $5/hr, worked his way up to shop foreman, making about $20/hr (a good thing, too, because he supported his wife, 2 kids and his parents). He was a good man and a hard worker. One Friday I’m heading out to lunch and I pass him on the road, pulled over by the police. I laugh and wave. After lunch, I try to give him a hard time for speeding or whatever he got pulled over for, and find out that he didn’t do anything wrong. He was on his way to his bank in the neighboring white city to deposit his paycheck, and got pulled over – for the SIXTH time in SIX months. And he only drove into that city EVERY OTHER FRIDAY to deposit his paycheck. This time, they confiscated his fishing knife (covered in fish blood and scales) out of his tackle box in the trunk, as if it were some illegal weapon. No ticket or anything. Go talk to other black and latino men and you’ll hear virtually the same story. It may only be anecdotal, but if you’re using a little common sense how can you not conclude that racial profiling happens?

    By the way, let’s dispense with the notion that “there is no proof” here. The evidence might be circumstantial but circumstantial evidence can be enough to prove a fact. If you leave your kid alone in a room with a cookie on the table, and no one else is home, and you come back into the room and the cookie is gone, do you know who took the cookie? Of course you do. What if the kid said “you have no proof”??? You would say no proof my butt. I’m not saying the evidence is that strong here, but if you told me that black men are being pulled over in this city at a rate ten times higher than white men but the moving violations rates are the same, I would say that’s pretty damning, even if there is no direct evidence of racial profiling. Circumstantial evidence can “prove” facts and is not necessarily qualitatively worse than direct evidence. Sometimes circumstantial evidence is stronger than direct evidence – confessions are sometimes false, eyewitness identifications are sometimes wrong.

    I think it’s fine to want the police to catch the bad guys – I do. It’s fine to say that the evidence doesn’t convince you of racial profiling. Can’t argue with what you say goes on in your head. But to assert that Doug is “totally off on this one” without additional facts to back up your assertion . . . you just plain don’t know that.

  42. He might be “totally off on this one” but how would you know? If you have personal knowledge of the facts beyond what is shown in the video, please share them with the rest of us.

    Why is it so hard for some to accept that the police sometimes (too often) engage in racial profiling? I used to work with a Mexican-American guy in his late 20s. He drove a lowered, black, mid-70s Chevy Impala, wore his hair slicked back, a goatee, a white tee shirt, baggy black pants. He started out as a welder for $5/hr, worked his way up to shop foreman, making about $20/hr (a good thing, too, because he supported his wife, 2 kids and his parents). He was a good man and a hard worker. One Friday I’m heading out to lunch and I pass him on the road, pulled over by the police. I laugh and wave. After lunch, I try to give him a hard time for speeding or whatever he got pulled over for, and find out that he didn’t do anything wrong. He was on his way to his bank in the neighboring white city to deposit his paycheck, and got pulled over – for the SIXTH time in SIX months. And he only drove into that city EVERY OTHER FRIDAY to deposit his paycheck. This time, they confiscated his fishing knife (covered in fish blood and scales) out of his tackle box in the trunk, as if it were some illegal weapon. No ticket or anything. Go talk to other black and latino men and you’ll hear virtually the same story. It may only be anecdotal, but if you’re using a little common sense how can you not conclude that racial profiling happens?

    By the way, let’s dispense with the notion that “there is no proof” here. The evidence might be circumstantial but circumstantial evidence can be enough to prove a fact. If you leave your kid alone in a room with a cookie on the table, and no one else is home, and you come back into the room and the cookie is gone, do you know who took the cookie? Of course you do. What if the kid said “you have no proof”??? You would say no proof my butt. I’m not saying the evidence is that strong here, but if you told me that black men are being pulled over in this city at a rate ten times higher than white men but the moving violations rates are the same, I would say that’s pretty damning, even if there is no direct evidence of racial profiling. Circumstantial evidence can “prove” facts and is not necessarily qualitatively worse than direct evidence. Sometimes circumstantial evidence is stronger than direct evidence – confessions are sometimes false, eyewitness identifications are sometimes wrong.

    I think it’s fine to want the police to catch the bad guys – I do. It’s fine to say that the evidence doesn’t convince you of racial profiling. Can’t argue with what you say goes on in your head. But to assert that Doug is “totally off on this one” without additional facts to back up your assertion . . . you just plain don’t know that.

  43. He might be “totally off on this one” but how would you know? If you have personal knowledge of the facts beyond what is shown in the video, please share them with the rest of us.

    Why is it so hard for some to accept that the police sometimes (too often) engage in racial profiling? I used to work with a Mexican-American guy in his late 20s. He drove a lowered, black, mid-70s Chevy Impala, wore his hair slicked back, a goatee, a white tee shirt, baggy black pants. He started out as a welder for $5/hr, worked his way up to shop foreman, making about $20/hr (a good thing, too, because he supported his wife, 2 kids and his parents). He was a good man and a hard worker. One Friday I’m heading out to lunch and I pass him on the road, pulled over by the police. I laugh and wave. After lunch, I try to give him a hard time for speeding or whatever he got pulled over for, and find out that he didn’t do anything wrong. He was on his way to his bank in the neighboring white city to deposit his paycheck, and got pulled over – for the SIXTH time in SIX months. And he only drove into that city EVERY OTHER FRIDAY to deposit his paycheck. This time, they confiscated his fishing knife (covered in fish blood and scales) out of his tackle box in the trunk, as if it were some illegal weapon. No ticket or anything. Go talk to other black and latino men and you’ll hear virtually the same story. It may only be anecdotal, but if you’re using a little common sense how can you not conclude that racial profiling happens?

    By the way, let’s dispense with the notion that “there is no proof” here. The evidence might be circumstantial but circumstantial evidence can be enough to prove a fact. If you leave your kid alone in a room with a cookie on the table, and no one else is home, and you come back into the room and the cookie is gone, do you know who took the cookie? Of course you do. What if the kid said “you have no proof”??? You would say no proof my butt. I’m not saying the evidence is that strong here, but if you told me that black men are being pulled over in this city at a rate ten times higher than white men but the moving violations rates are the same, I would say that’s pretty damning, even if there is no direct evidence of racial profiling. Circumstantial evidence can “prove” facts and is not necessarily qualitatively worse than direct evidence. Sometimes circumstantial evidence is stronger than direct evidence – confessions are sometimes false, eyewitness identifications are sometimes wrong.

    I think it’s fine to want the police to catch the bad guys – I do. It’s fine to say that the evidence doesn’t convince you of racial profiling. Can’t argue with what you say goes on in your head. But to assert that Doug is “totally off on this one” without additional facts to back up your assertion . . . you just plain don’t know that.

  44. He might be “totally off on this one” but how would you know? If you have personal knowledge of the facts beyond what is shown in the video, please share them with the rest of us.

    Why is it so hard for some to accept that the police sometimes (too often) engage in racial profiling? I used to work with a Mexican-American guy in his late 20s. He drove a lowered, black, mid-70s Chevy Impala, wore his hair slicked back, a goatee, a white tee shirt, baggy black pants. He started out as a welder for $5/hr, worked his way up to shop foreman, making about $20/hr (a good thing, too, because he supported his wife, 2 kids and his parents). He was a good man and a hard worker. One Friday I’m heading out to lunch and I pass him on the road, pulled over by the police. I laugh and wave. After lunch, I try to give him a hard time for speeding or whatever he got pulled over for, and find out that he didn’t do anything wrong. He was on his way to his bank in the neighboring white city to deposit his paycheck, and got pulled over – for the SIXTH time in SIX months. And he only drove into that city EVERY OTHER FRIDAY to deposit his paycheck. This time, they confiscated his fishing knife (covered in fish blood and scales) out of his tackle box in the trunk, as if it were some illegal weapon. No ticket or anything. Go talk to other black and latino men and you’ll hear virtually the same story. It may only be anecdotal, but if you’re using a little common sense how can you not conclude that racial profiling happens?

    By the way, let’s dispense with the notion that “there is no proof” here. The evidence might be circumstantial but circumstantial evidence can be enough to prove a fact. If you leave your kid alone in a room with a cookie on the table, and no one else is home, and you come back into the room and the cookie is gone, do you know who took the cookie? Of course you do. What if the kid said “you have no proof”??? You would say no proof my butt. I’m not saying the evidence is that strong here, but if you told me that black men are being pulled over in this city at a rate ten times higher than white men but the moving violations rates are the same, I would say that’s pretty damning, even if there is no direct evidence of racial profiling. Circumstantial evidence can “prove” facts and is not necessarily qualitatively worse than direct evidence. Sometimes circumstantial evidence is stronger than direct evidence – confessions are sometimes false, eyewitness identifications are sometimes wrong.

    I think it’s fine to want the police to catch the bad guys – I do. It’s fine to say that the evidence doesn’t convince you of racial profiling. Can’t argue with what you say goes on in your head. But to assert that Doug is “totally off on this one” without additional facts to back up your assertion . . . you just plain don’t know that.

  45. Profiling is a common sense tool of identity politics. How else to identify various self professed cultural traits toward others and society in general? We do it every day in deciding who we open the door to.

  46. Profiling is a common sense tool of identity politics. How else to identify various self professed cultural traits toward others and society in general? We do it every day in deciding who we open the door to.

  47. Profiling is a common sense tool of identity politics. How else to identify various self professed cultural traits toward others and society in general? We do it every day in deciding who we open the door to.

  48. Profiling is a common sense tool of identity politics. How else to identify various self professed cultural traits toward others and society in general? We do it every day in deciding who we open the door to.

Leave a Comment