Let me share two brief personal stories about what you termed racial profiling.

I worked in an area where auto theft was a major problem to the tune of close to 30,000 thefts a year. It was in the New York metropolitan region and primarily involved three abutting counties. Statistics showed that the vast majority of these thefts, I believe about 90% but give me a couple of points either way, were committed by young black teenage males out of urban areas. Racial tensions arose in a certain community. I met with a group of police executives, clergy from several African-American churches and hundreds of angry residents who felt profiling young black males was becoming a problem. After several heated exchanges charging racism and profiling, two factors were put on the table. Many of the theft victims were from the same neighborhoods represented at the meeting and the above mentioned statistic about the perpetrators.

A young, educated, respected, minister stood up, quieted the audience and said, "If our community has been victimized and thieves have been statistically identified as young black males from urban areas, why wouldn't the police be checking them out. If my car was stolen, I would expect them to be checking those who fit the profile."

To a large extent the audience agreed. The meeting ended and the host church put out a buffet of homemade desserts, coffee, beverages and good will as the police and congregation broke bread together. This fairy tale ending did not stop the problem but the dialogue helped both sides to understand each others perspectives. This was only a microcosm of the effected communities, but it was a small victory for both sides. Ultimately, a joint auto theft task force that was covered on, I believe, 60 Minutes, was able to lower the number of thefts to a fraction of numbers at the peak of the problem and became a model for agencies across the country.

My second racial profiling experience. The New Jersey State Police had established special task forces that worked the southern end of the NJ Turnpike. They did target gun and drug runners coming up from southern states. This was the main pipeline for moving drugs and guns into the metropolitan area and points north up into New England. They were highly successful in interdicting this dangerous and deadly contraband. The traffickers complained about the inconvenience and tactics used by the State Police. Al Sharpton and others protested the use of profiling and that ultimately led to the disbanding of the task forces, an investigation into the State Police and the early retirement of an effective and honest State Police Superintendant who didn't deny profiling but instead showed the statistics that validated it. This occurred during the Whitman administration for those looking for a time frame. I concede that the Superintendant's position was and still is a politically incorrect position and could be debated on its merits from both sides of the issue. That debate never took place because spineless politicians and the media railroaded a good man who did his job.

Interestingly, because of my close professional interest in this issue, I recall the same Al Sharpton, several years later, protesting the increased and rampant shootings and drug abuse in Newark, N.J. and the surrounding areas. He further criticized the New Jersey State Police for not interdicting the flow of guns and drugs into this area.

Folks, you can't make this stuff up.

Redwitch, one of the problems with profiling has been the lack of a standard definition. People use it in a context that the media has largely portrayed as negative and something it really isn't. The F.B.I. for years has used profilers to identify those who are likely to commit certain violent crimes. In recent years mountains of statistics have been collated and analyzed to project with some degree of probability who is going to commit a crime and where the most likely locations might be based on previous experience. Police frequently deploy to these areas with a degree of success. This type of profiling has also been used when trying to identify potential terrorists who intend to kill and maim innocent people.

Unfortunately, there is another definition that has been bred by overzealous police officers who will make a stop based solely on race and that has been the cross that the vast majority of dedicated, honest police officers have been stereotyped with. That is the one that is constantly interjected by career felons, defense lawyers and the media.