Just out of interest, does anybody know if the police (in any country) are still inclined, allowed or even still in the habit of using racial "identifiers" amongst themselves....say when they're on the hunt for a person, and all they've got is an eye-witness description? You know the usual way they go for things like height, build, gender, hair-colour, clothing etc....??
I'm not saying that if they still do, it's any kind of dispensation.....but I'm imagining scenarios where putting a hand on somebody is important, and there's no polite thought given to what they share with their fellow hunters in terms of ANY relevant identifiers which could assist that cause.
There's still an appropriate way to describe skin colour off course, but I'm talking about just how high up the list it appears as a "primary" descriptor....especially when the situation is deemed to be an emergency. Also, because a felon on the run can easily change his/her clothes, vehicle, hair etc....it would be mighty tempting to hone in on something that can't easily be changed. Their "whiteness" for example? Which would at least narrow down their search....and in some communities....might do so by about 50%.
I guess I'm asking at what point (and for whom) does all sensitivity and propriety just get abandoned and the attitude:
"We're not fucking about here..."
...kick in, and it becomes ok to use ANYTHING which can act as a valid descriptor? Leaving offence or hurt feelings and such-like to be dealt with only once the primary objective is attained?
