We test racial attitude on our online testing site.
There was an article regarding RAS and the Presidential Election back in August through the National Press Club's 180 news offices and US Newswire DC Circuit.

Just to try the survey doesn't cost, only to get statistics feedback there is a small fee.

We used University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research's Library back in 1968. RAS was upgraded by an Organizational Psychology for her Ph.D 1997 to be American Psychological Association's Test Guidelines.

I am a www.roundtablegroup.com scholar for diversity issues.

Racial Profiling.
I am a former federal employee who worked at a port of entry, protecting American agriculture by intercepting meat and plant products which were prohibited from entering the USA because they were known to have a high probability of carrying organisms detrimental to US agriculture.
The lines of people selected for secondary questioning or baggage search were often people of foreign origin. This was not because we were prejudiced, but because these people were more likely to be carrying item which were prohibited. Many did not know that these items were prohibited nor the reason why the items were prohibited, or they did not understand the baggage declaration that they had signed. Their prohibited items were confiscated, inspected and destroyed. If they attempted to conceal or smuggle the items, they were fined in US dollars. Some repeat offenders knew that their items were prohibited but wanted their native food regardless of the consequence to American agriculture.
It is not prejudice. An American tourist, no matter what color they are, is far less likely to be carrying prohibited food or other agricultural items than a foreign born traveler. Many foreign travelers and foreign nationals who are US residents were quick to play the "you are a racist" card, but the exception to that rule was anyone from Australia. Being an island, their agriculture could not survive an infestation of any sort and consequently their inspection of travelers entering Australia is much more tough than what travelers to the US endure. Australians who enter the US submit to questioning and inspection with a great deal of understanding. And not all of the Australian tourists I inspected were of European ancestry. But all were educated in the havoc that a foreign pest can wreck upon agriculture.
The US has such nice produce and healthy livestock because the introduction of new foreign pests is kept to a minimum through port of entry inspection.

Thank you for sharing your viewpoint. Please note the following two issues:
1. The justice system has two purposes: First, to punish the guilty and second, to protect the innocent. Justice operates on the principle of individual responsibility, but it does not operate on the alleged probability principle. For example, statistically, more than 80% serial killers are white males, but the system cannot assume that being a while male makes the person more likely to become a serial killer.

By the same token, If some foreign-born U.S. residents bring in some forbidden foods, that does not imply every foreign-born person has a higher a probability to do the infraction. selecting all in the same category for additional investigations does disservice to the purpose of protecting the innocent.

2. There is no question that most people in law enforcement have noble motivation. My main point in the post is that prejudice is type of cognitive distortions, which is different from motivation.
Thank you again for your comments.

There are only three (3) "races"; Negroid, Mongoloid, Caucasoid.
"Hispanic" is not a "race" it's an ethnic group just like "Celtic", "Tarter", or "Saxon."
And the term "Hispanic" has no basis in science, it was "invented" by U.S. government beaurocrats to "classify" groups of people.
It amazes me that otherwise "educated" people never pickup on this fact. They must not remember their high school science classes.
Conversely, I, being of Irish heratage can't go around calling myself a differant "race" by referring to myself as, "Celtic."
Unless someone in the "Hispanic" classification is Black or Asian then they're Caucaision.

The reason racial profiling exists is because some races commit more crimes than their percentage of the population warrants; in other words, some races are more likely to commit crimes at a higher rate than is average for the entire population. Since law enforcement personnel are aware of these statistics, and since higher crime rates generate a higher rate of suspect description reports, law enforcement personnel are naturally going to stop and question more of whatever race they think is commiting the most crimes. It is so simple that all of this scientific/philosophical causation bilge is just mind-boggling. Will the main-stream media talk about these disproportionate crime statistics in a rational way, and initiate a national debate on the subject? Not on your life. They would much rather source their blather with an infinite continuum of psychobabble and existential nonsense. It so much more safe to be politically correct. It is also pathetic.

http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.html

99% of the crimes are committed by people of lower socioeconomic status, not by people of particular race. If police officers want to prevent crime, should they profile anyone who happens to be in the lower class?

why cant we just tell the truth about racial profiling.anybody thats non caucasian is always going to be racially profiled ,as long as we have caucasian police in uniform.you know white is always right and superior in their minds.look at the rodney king incident,. nine out of ten whites said the police were just doing their jobs --- they were trained to do. most of the whites that are on the police force are low income, black folk hating officers .they cant wait to get their hands on their first black ,or latino or asian. ,so that they can take out all of their frustrations ,of a lifetime out on these other races.they know that the mayor, the governor and the white community in general,is going to back them up . whether they are right or wrong.so why not bash some heads,why not profile,why not be just plain old biased ,prejudiced and down right nasty to the races they deem lower than them.?thats the truth. if we recieve it ,it will set us free.

It is a fact that foreign born travelers bring back food from their country of origin, this is because of several reasons:
1) this is their first trip to the US, they want to bring a gift and they don't understand their baggage declaration;
2) their relatives made food for them and they want to bring that comfort food to share with other family members or friends in the US, (and it doesn't matter if the pork sausage is chorizo or wurst, if their grandma made it, they want it even if it is prohibited entry into the US);
3)they cannot find it in the US where they are living or visiting;
4) they don't understand why their items are not allowed entry into the US; or
5) they know that the food items are prohibited but chose to try to bring them in anyway.
Perhaps they have smuggled in items previously or know of someone who has.
I once had a female passenger lie about the chorizo she had in her purse. She was coming from Mexico by air. She had been sent for secondary inspection and had had her baggage and personal items sent through the X-ray machine. I saw the chorizo in her purse on the X-ray and asked her what she had in her purse. She told me that she had some used sanitary pads. I asked her again if she had any food items. She said no. I opened her purse, removed the chorizo which had been packed in sanitary pads and told her that she would be fined because she lied to me and intended to smuggle in the prohibited chorizo. She became indignant and said that when she was inspected at a border crossing that no one had opened her purse! She was mad at me for doing my job correctly.
I found prohibited food items secreted in jacket linings, packed inside of ceramic figurines, in false bottoms of boxes, hidden under clothing, tucked under infant's blankets, just to name a few places! Very few people sent to have their baggage inspected did not have a food item. Not all of these items were prohibited, but most were.
99% of people sent to have their baggage inspected were foreign born or first generation US residents who were returning from their country of origin. They wanted the food of their childhood and were often willing to risk a stiff fine or compromise American agriculture for their own taste buds. The determined smugglers were quite prevalent on certain flights.
This isn't prejudice, this is fact based.
Would you want to pay more for your groceries, have herds of livestock or fields of food crops destroyed because a pest from another country entered the US because someone carrying a prohibited food item in their baggage was not questioned because "racial profiling" is unfair to the innocent?

I have indectly replied to your comment in my new post "Racial profiling and a misunderstanding of probability" at the following web address:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-justice-and-responsibility-leagu...

Thanks.