#racial profiling

Maricopa Co. Sheriff's Office has been under court oversight since 2013 after racial profiling case

By: Melissa Blasius

Posted 3:44 PM, Jun 25, 2026 and last updated 1 hour and 35 minutes ago

A federal judge in the Melendres case heard arguments Friday on whether years of federal oversight have sufficiently transformed the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office or if continued monitoring is needed.

okay most domestic abuse- i mean physical abuse- i mean domestic abuse we actually give a shit about happens to women from men. thus, racially- i mean sexually profiling them will mean you accurately catch them

of course there'll be some innocents caught but like, shouldn't have been male? what are you doing having a girlfriend or wife with that skin tone- i mean gender? c'mon bro lock in

Okay We Get It The Duluth Model Is Basically Racism For Gender Get On With It:

well the first clever quip to analyze is "dv we care about," which is in reference to the fact we as a society do not care when men are abused. no really, imagine an average woman slapping an average man, and then imagine an average man slapping an average woman.* your visceral, gut reaction is to be way more concerned about the slapee in the second case.

this has been studied too, bystanders react significantly more when women are hit than when men are, go to the MRAs for details

*mean 21 year old american male, mean 21 year old american female, public setting

Why The Duluth Model Is Actually Right:

because "being a woman who gets hit by a man" is something only women can do*, obviously important DV is going to be something that's from men to women, even if she's actually more abusive than he is (*jury's still out on why it happens, we'll need more studies and testimony from experts, but the leading crackpot theory is that being a woman is something only women can do)

which means, if your only goal is to minimize Important Domestic Violence, and you don't care about "unimportant domestic abuse" or "fairness" or that worthless "ethics," then the duluth model is the simplest way to achieve that. it's even immune to tomfuckery and police biases with how simple and straightforwards it is

you wouldn't check if a negative number is greater than zero, right?

Didn't You Literally Just Compare It To Racial Profiling???:

yeah uhh, that's also kinda legit:

Fact: Crime is caused by poverty (true. don't argue it's not just... just don't)

Fact: Due to lack of socioeconomic mobility and maybe slavery, black people are disproportionately poorer than white people (self evident. you're most likely left wing, "Racism made black people poor and its shadow still echoes today" isn't something i need to argue to you)

Conclusion: due to Fact 2, if you are looking for a poor person, you are more likely to find one when looking for a black person

Conclusion: due to Fact 1, if you are looking for a criminal, you are more likely to find one when looking for a poor person

Conclusion: due to Conclusions 3 and 4, if you are looking for a criminal, the best way to do that is to look for a poor person, and the best way to do that is to look for a black person...

"OBJECTION! Misandry also falls under this, you even made a Post about it!"

it does. the best way to find a criminal is to look for a man, since men are more likely to be the ones who commit them. frankly domestic abuse is an outlier in how much of it women actually do if you really dig into the data, kind of unexpected

"So What Do We Do With This?"

well i just went over it no, the best way to find an abuser or violent criminal is to *Actually look for people who commit crimes.*

"obviousl-wait what"

remember a few paragraphs ago when i said:

"if your only goal is to minimize Important Domestic Violence, and you don't care about "unimportant domestic abuse" or "fairness" or that worthless "ethics,""

yeah, it turns out these profiling methods are only effective when you don't have more information, or don't actually care about innocents, or don't have ethics. it turns out the best way to find criminals is to look for criminals, not to round up people who are statistically slightly more likely to be criminals

i mean, if we did that we'd end up doing something utterly ridiculous like throwing young men in jail if they don't have enough money... but you wouldn't support that, right? nobody could support imprisoning entire demographics for no actual crimes, right?

Conclusion:

btw this is also the problem with affirmative action and DEI. the best way to help people who were disadvantaged is to find people who were disadvantaged and help them, not to just throw money at people who are statistically more likely to be disadvantaged.

yes DEI and racial profiling are two sides of the same coin. rather, they're the same thing in a slightly different direction

In the North of Ireland

They're racially profiling cars

They're throwing bricks and kicking down doors into homes

They're setting glider busses on fire

They've almost fully skinned the cheek of a young girl wearing hijab

And Elon Musk is openly supporting these actions on TWITTER.