Before I respond, le me just say, I had a great time at the convention, and never engaged in any heavy political or philosophical discussions. UNless whether the girl at the other end of the bar was a hooker qualifies.

I believe good people can disagree on the subject, but from my experience, and in my studies, I have found that profiling has been used as a form of discrimination in this country since before the Revolution. The Irish were subjected to it for a century, Blacks for hundreds of years and still today (DWB=Driving while black).

Individuals who are thought to be Gay have their rights limited "to protect the children", although evidence clearly shows that heterosexual men are significantly more likely to commit crimed (sex crimes) against children.

Archie used a number of examples (which can be matched with any number of groups) to show a propensity. I suggest that if you are in the middle east, most crime is committed by middle eastern men between their mid teens and 40.

Go to a black neighborhood, and most crimes are committed by male blacks between 17-40. Go to Ireland and most crimes are committed by males 17-40 (Catholic areas male catholics, protestant areas, protestants).

Most of the crime committed in this country will be committed by white males between 17-40. I spend part of almost every day dealing with excesses of law enforcement stemming from profiling.

History is awash in examples of the abuses that occur when societies waive the freedoms of some, for the comfort of the majority.

And unless there has been a tremendous rash of hi jackings in the last several months, Male whites still make up the bulk of documented hijackings in this country.

Finally, if we begin to treat this group differently, it will justify their blanket critiques of our system. We wont be safer, we wont be more secure. Hence they win.