The document discusses racial profiling by law enforcement and proposes a policy to address it. It identifies racial profiling as a harm that undermines justice and trust in communities. The plan mandates passing the End Racial Profiling Act to ban profiling and implementing training to address bias. Implementing this policy would eliminate profiling, making law enforcement more efficient and restoring trust between police and minority groups.

1. 1
Town Hall Brief
Racial Profiling
Introduction: Racial profiling reflects bias actions reinforced by
law enforcement based on race, religion, and
nationality/ethnicity which has led to violence and unjust
accusations amongst minority groups. This has become a
controversial issue in our nation, as stated in an article
published by The Huffington Post website, in 2011, which
displays a chart showing that the NYPD uses force against
Blacks and Latinos 6.7% more than whites. It is evident that the
police work force exemplifies inefficiency through racial
profiling which calls for change and improvement in the
training process. By thoroughly conducting proper training for
law enforcement, with an emphasis on racial profiling, police
officers and authority will reform effectively.
Inherency: The inherency is attitudinal and structural. In order
to supply change there must be awareness to promote the issue
and new laws to improve the justice system. As reported by the
Tolerance website accessed on March 26, 2015, “Community
members must be empowered with awareness and steps they can
take to address profiling or other abuses of police authority
when they occur” which emphasizes that citizens should grasp
knowledge of racial profiling in order to prevent being targeted.

2. According to an article published by the We Are One America
website accessed on March 26, 2015, “Congress should
introduce and pass the "End Racial Profiling Act" which would
ban racial profiling at the federal, state and local level” this
explains that minority groups will continue to be abused without
change of policy.
Harms
Claim 1: Law enforcement authorities result in extreme force
when practicing racial profiling.
Ground 1A: The Washington Post website, on December 15,
2014, reported “In Garner’s case, for example, police targeted
him for the petty crime of selling loose cigarettes — the types
of crimes black people are targeted for at higher rates — and
then attempted to arrest him with a chokehold, banned by the
department [of New York City]. Whatever else we have learned
from the recent tragedies of police violence, it is clear that we
need comprehensive federal, state and local policies that outlaw
racial profiling and rein in police excessive force.”
Ground 1B: The Huffington Post website, on December 9, 2014,
stated “If we have learned anything from the recent tragic
deaths of Garner and Brown, as well as the experiences of
numerous other African American victims of police violence
going back decades -- from Rodney King to Abner Louima to
Amadou Diallo and Tamir Rice -- it is that excessive force and
racial profiling are two destructive modes of police misconduct
that require concerted, vigilant action to reduce and eliminate.”
Warrant: It is clear that patterns of excessive force have been
displayed through exercising racial profiling. These unlawful
functions ultimately flaw the justice system by targeting
citizens based on race and using actions that are banned which
emphasis the unnecessary force taken by the law enforcement.
Claim 2: Racial profiling creates inefficiency in the justice
system.
Ground 2A: The New York Civil Liberties Union website,

3. accessed March 26, 2015, claimed “that innocent New Yorkers
have been subjected to police stops and street interrogations
more than 4 million times since 2002, and that Black and Latino
communities continue to be the overwhelming target of these
tactics. Nearly nine out of 10 stopped-and-frisked New Yorkers
have been completely innocent, according to the NYPD’s own
reports.”
Ground 2B: “A 2005 report by the Missouri attorney general is
testimony to the ineffectiveness of racial profiling. White
drivers, pulled over and searched on the basis of suspicious
behavior, were found to have drugs or other illegal material
24% of the time. Black drivers pulled over or searched in a
manner that reflected a pattern of racial profiling, were found to
have drugs or other illegal material 19% of the time. The
effectiveness of searches, in Missouri and everywhere else, is
reduced--not enhanced--by racial profiling. When racial
profiling is used, officers end up wasting their limited time on
innocent suspects” as noted by the About News website
accessed on March 26, 2015.
Warrant: The fact that law enforcement authorities spend time
focusing on minority groups, which is a mass inefficiency to the
time that they use by practicing racial profiling. This concludes
the idea that police officers’ time is valuable because they are
meant to protect citizens therefore they should be productive
and disregard race as a factor to a crime.
Claim 3: Instability in communities is formed through use of
racial profiling.
Ground 3A: The National Institution of Justice website, January
10, 2013, stated “Racial and ethnic minority perceptions that the
police lack lawfulness and legitimacy, based largely on their
interactions with the police, can lead to distrust of the police.
Distrust of police has serious consequences. It undermines the
legitimacy of law enforcement, and without legitimacy police
lose their ability and authority to function effectively.”
Ground 3B: In an article written by Jasmine Elliot, June 29,
2010, on the ACLU website wrote “Racial profiling erodes trust

4. between law enforcement and its community. As a result, people
are less likely to report a crime or work with the police to give
information that could apprehend an actual criminal.”
Warrant: A community cannot function without trust between
the police therefore it creates an unstable environment.
Residents begin to fear and mistrust the officers, who exercise
racial profiling, and are meant to bring peace. This exhausts
cooperation between the people and officers.
Plan:
Mandate: The policy that will result in a solution requires two
steps. The first step is passing the End Racial Profiling Act
which will ban use of racial profiling in all levels of the
government. Secondly, the policy would include implementing a
proper training that highlights bias decisions based on race,
ethnicity, religion, and nationality.
Agent of Action: United States Federal Congress
Agent of Enforcement: Department of Justice
Funding: Generates from taxes; percentage cut out of
Department of Justice (Depending on number of states that
reform; therefore accurate amount is unknown)
Advantages:
Claim 1: It is constitutionally correct to pass a policy banning
the use of racial profiling which appeals to tradition.
Ground 1A: The National Motorist Association website,
accessed March 26, 2015, stated “The Fourth Amendment of the
United States Constitution prohibits a person from being
stopped or detained without evidence that he or she was
involved in a crime. This should protect people from being the
victims of unfair pretextual traffic stops*. Unfortunately, as
incidents of racial profiling were escalating, the United States
Supreme Court's interpretation of the Fourth Amendment was
becoming less protective of individuals' rights.”

5. Ground 1B: The Find Law website, accessed March 26, 2015,
stated “Fourth Amendment – Search and Seizure - The right of
the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing
the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be
seized.”
Warrant: Based on the United States Constitution, actions taken
by law enforcement authorities are unlawfully exercising there
powers through racial profiling. Therefore acts should be passed
in order to maintain justice and equality; even though we have
an amendment that states the “right of the people”, but a law
that asserts racial profiling.
Claim 2: Establishing law enforcement training that underlines
profiling-bias relations will eliminate racial profiling.
Ground 2A: Stated by the Here and Now website, August 15,
2014, “police departments can change their relationships with
their communities by training their officers to recognize and set
aside their biases.”
Ground 2B: “Fridell is an associate professor in the department
of criminology at the University of South Florida and has
developed model curriculums called “Fair and Impartial
Policing […] the program is based on the science of bias and
has successfully worked in cities around the country” noted by
Here and Now website, August 15, 2014.
Warrant: As a result of regulating the way law enforcement
authorities are trained this will produce an equal perception
amongst all races.
Disadvantage
Claim 1: Providing body cameras to police officers is costly and
neglects public privacy.

6. Ground 1A: Matthew Feeney wrote, in an article on the Cato
Institute website, on February 12, 2015, “If footage from police
body cameras is considered public record then hours of footage
of innocent people’s interactions with police officers is
potentially available.”
Ground 1B: Written in an article by Drew Harwell, on
December 3, 2014, in the Washington Post website says
“President Obama's call this week to spend $75 million to outfit
America’s police departments with body cameras”
Warrant: Using body cameras as a solution is inefficient by
spending an excessive amount of money in order to make
officers do something they should be doing which is monitoring
their actions. It also abuses the civilians that are being recorded
throughout the day of police officers routine, which invades
their privacy by being displayed in the recordings.
Conclusion: Law enforcement authorities’ actions reflect the
nation as a whole by exercising the right or wrong methods to
fulfill their duties. Through affectively promoting what racial
profiling is and the side effects of it, the Department of Justice
and Congress can execute the plan to eradicate racial profiling
in the system. The idea is simple. Target the issue (racial
profiling). Then recognize how it hinders the system which
includes mistrust in communities, not utilizing police officers’
time efficiently, and the excessive force used by law
enforcement on minority groups.
Bibliography
"Racial Profiling: Face the Truth Campaign." Racial Profiling:
Face the Truth Campaign. OneAmerica, n.d. Web. 26 Mar.
2015.
"Racial Profiling." Racial Profiling. Teaching Tolerance, n.d.
Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Mathias, Christopher. "NYPD Stop And Frisks: 15 Shocking
Facts About A Controversial Program." The Huffington Post.

7. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 15 May 2012. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Natarajan, Ranjana. "Comprehensive National Policy That
Outlaws Racial Profiling Should Cover State, Local
Police." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 9 Dec.
2014. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
"Stop-and-Frisk Campaign: About the Issue." New York City
Liberties Union. NYCLU, n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Natarajan, Ranjana. "Racial Profiling Has Destroyed Public
Trust in Police. Cops Are Exploiting Our Weak Laws against
It." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 15 Dec. 2014. Web.
26 Mar. 2015.
Head, Tom. "Arguments Against Racial Profiling." Civil
Liberty. About News, n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
"Race, Trust and Police Legitimacy." National Institute of
Justice. NIJ, 10 Jan. 2013. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Elliott, Jasmine. "Racial Profiling Is Ineffective, Distracting,
and Detrimental to Public Safety." American Civil Liberties
Union. ACLU, 6 June 2012. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
"The Supreme Court And Racial Profiling." The Supreme Court
And Racial Profiling. NMA, n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Hobson, Jeremy, and Robin Young. "Training Police To Put
Aside Their Biases." Here & Now. Here & Now, 15 Aug. 2014.
Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Feeney, Matthew. "Police Body Cameras Raise Privacy Issues
for Cops and the Public." Cato Institute. Cato Institute, 12 Feb.
2015. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Harwell, Drew. "The Body-camera." Washington Post. The
Washington Post, 3 Dec. 2014. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Grading Rubric for the Town Hall Brief
For the Brief:
1. Does it fulfill the stock issues of a policy proposition
a. Does your brief actually deal with the topic?
b. Do you identify the Inherent barrier for your plan?
c. Do you identify the harms currently happening in the status
quo?

8. i. Must present at least 3 harms
ii. Must demonstrate a significant problem that is currently
happening in the status quo.
d. Do you present a workable plan that actually solves your
harms and significantly changes the status quo?
e. Do you present side effects of the plan?
i. Must present two advantages
ii. Must present at least one disadvantage of another plan/idea
2. Does it follow the Toulmin model
a. Do you clearly identify your claims, warrants, and grounds?
b. Do your claims advocate a position?
c. Do your warrants explain your claims and clearly show the
links between your claim and grounds?
d. Do you present at least 2 ground statements for each claim
and warrant?
3. Evidence
a. Do you present evidence from a variety of credible sources?
b. Do you at least have 8 sources?
c. Do you follow APA or MLA guidelines for your works
cited/reference page?
d. Do you follow the class in-text format for citations?
e. Do you apply the tests of evidence to your sources? Again
are they credible?
4. Presentation of Brief
a. Is it well written? Does it follow proper
grammatical/technical writing
b. Is everything clearly labeled?
c. Does it have a strong Introduction and Conclusion?
d. Is it typed?
e. Is it proof-read?
f. Is it turned in on time?
g. Is it stapled? Is your name on it? Is your works
cited/reference page attached?
h. Is it in my hands no later than 10 minutes after the start of
class?

9. Claim: Banning homework will lead to a real passion for
learning
Ground: Mary Jane Cera is the academic administrator for the
Kino School, a private, nonprofit K – 12 school in Tucson,
Arizona, which maintains a no-homework policy across all
grades. The purpose of the policy is to make sure learning
remains a joy for students, not a second shift of work that
impedes social time and creative activity. Cera says that when
new students are told there will be no homework assignments,
they breathe a sigh of relief.
Many proponents of homework argue that life is filled with
things we don’t like to do, and that homework teaches self-
discipline, time management and other nonacademic life skills.
Kohn challenges this popular notion: If kids have no choice in
the matter of homework, they’re not really exercising judgment,
and are instead losing their sense of autonomy.
At the Kino school, Cera says children often choose to take
their favorite parts of school home. “A lot of what we see kids
doing is continuing to write in journals, practicing music with
their friends, and taking experiments home to show their
parents,” she says. Anecdotal information from Kino graduates
suggests that the early control over their education continues to
serve them well into college; they feel better equipped to
manage their time and approach professors with questions.
Warrant: This evidence clearly indicates that when students are
no longer burdened with homework they begin to see school not
as a chore but as a vehicle to pursue their interests and
passions. This switch in how individuals will perceive
education will improve academic scores, attendance, and overall
acquisition of knowledge.
Works cited.
Sorrentino, J. (2013, July 29). The Homework Debate.
Education Magazine. Accessed on February 10, 2014.

10. http://www.education.com/magazine/article/The_Homework_De
bate/
How to Complete the
Town Hall Brief and
Toulmin Assignments
Town Hall Brief – 150 points
WHEN WRITING THIS ASSIGNMENT WE
WILL BE TREATING THIS AS DEBATE
BRIEF RATHER THAN A TRADITIONAL
ESSAY. BASICALLY, THE BULK OF THIS
PAPER WILL BE FINDING DIRECT
QUOTATIONS/PIECES OF EVIDENCE TO
SUPPORT THE ARGUMENTS THAT YOU
ARE MAKING.
01
WE WILL BE FOLLOWING THE
TOULMIN MODEL FOR THIS
ASSIGNMENT.
02
WE WILL BE FOLLOWING THE POLICY
STOCK ISSUES WITH THIS ASSIGNMENT.
03

11. 1st – The
Introduction
• You will write a 6 – 8 sentence paragraph introducing
the assignment.
A. In the introduction I want you to provide an
attention getting statement just like you would
do in a traditional essay.
B. You will then need to explain what sub-topic
was chosen for your brief. I do not want you to
try and fix the entire agricultural system. I
want you to pick one area and fix that.
C. Justify what you have chosen this sub-topic
area. What makes it special? What makes it
important? Why is it necessary that we fix this
area first?
D. You will not specifically state the word
Topicality in this section. However, when I read
the introduction I will be able to determine if
your sub-topic relates to the general topic.
2nd – The
Inherency
• You will write one paragraph
explaining the inherency barrier.
Remember the barrier is what
needs to be removed in order for
your plan to take place.

12. • You must specifically label if the
barrier is structural, attitudinal,
or trend.
• You must provide one source that
proves the barrier exists.
3rd – The Harms
• You must present 3 harms in your brief.
• When writing the briefs you will follow the Toulmin
model.
• The Toulmin Model for Debate Briefs:
• Claim – one sentence stating a claim.
• Ground A – Direct Quotation coming specifically
from your evidence. You should have an oral in-text
citation when presenting your evidence.
• Ground B – Direct Quotation coming specifically
from your evidence. You should have an oral in-text
citation when presenting your evidence.
• Warrant – 2-6 sentences explaining the evidence
and why it supports the above claim.
• This counts as one harm/argument.
Harms

13. Continued:
• Your harms section will
follow this outline:
• Harm 1
• Claim 1
• Ground 1A
• Ground 1B
• Warrant
• Harm 2
• Claim 2
• Ground 2A
• Ground 2B
• Warrant
• Harm 3
• Claim 3
• Ground 3A
• Ground 3B
• Warrant
4 – The Plan
• The Plan is a very short part of your paper.
However, your plan has to make sure that
it solves the harms that you have
presented.
• The steps of your plan
1. Mandate – What you plan to do.
2. Agent of Action: Simply label which

14. government body will pass your
plan.
3. Agent of Enforcement: Simply label
with agency will enforce your plan.
4. Funding: Tell me how much it will
cost or how you will generate money
from plan.
5th – The
Advantages
• You will write two
advantages.
Remember advantages
explains the benefits of
passing the plan.
• The advantages will
follow the Toulmin
Model
Advantages
Continued
• Advantage 1
• Claim 1
• Ground 1A
• Ground 1B
• Warrant

15. • Advantage 2
• Claim 2
• Ground 2A
• Ground 2B
• Warrant
6th – The
Disadvantage
• You will write one
disadvantage.
• The disadvantage will NOT
attack your plan.
• The disadvantage will attack
another plan idea for deal
with the agricultural industry.
• The disadvantage will follow
the Toulmin Model.
Disadvantage
Continued
•Disadvantage 1
•Claim
•Ground 1A
•Ground 1B
•Warrant

16. 7th – The
Conclusion
• You will write a short
conclusion just
summarizing why your
plan is the best first step
to solving the problems
within the topic area.
• The plan should be at
least 4 – 6 sentences in
length.
8th – Works Cited
Page
• You will need to have at least 8
sources for this assignment.
• You should quote from credible
and reliable sources of
evidence.
• You should follow either MLA
or APA guidelines when
creating your works cited page.
Please look on Canvas to find
an example of the Town Hall

17. Brief.
Example can be found in the Town Hall/Toulmin Module
Toulmin Assignment – 50 points.
THIS ASSIGNMENT WAS
DESIGNED TO MOTIVATE
YOU TO WORK ON YOUR
TOWN HALL BRIEF
SOONER RATHER THAN
LATER.
01
I WANT YOU TO SIMPLY
WRITE ONE SHORTENED
ARGUMENT THAT YOU
COULD THEN SIMPLY CUT
AND PASTE INTO THE
LARGER TOWN HALL BRIEF
IF YOU WANTED TO.
02
YOU WILL FOLLOW THE
TOULMIN MODEL.
03
Toulmin Paper
Structure
• Claim – 1 sentence providing

18. your opinion.
• Ground – Direct quotation
coming from your evidence.
• Warrant – An explanation of
the evidence and why the
evidence supports the claim.
This should be between at
least 2 – 6 sentences.
• You will need a works cited at
the bottom of the page.
Please look on Canvas to find
an example of the Toulmin
Paper
Example can be found in the Town Hall/Toulmin Module.
How to Complete the Town Hall Brief and Toulmin
AssignmentsTown Hall Brief – 150 points1st – The
Introduction2nd – The Inherency3rd – The HarmsHarms
Continued:4 – The Plan5th – The AdvantagesAdvantages
Continued6th – The DisadvantageDisadvantage Continued7th –
The Conclusion8th – Works Cited PagePlease look on Canvas to
find an example of the Town Hall Brief.Toulmin Assignment –
50 points.Toulmin Paper StructurePlease look on Canvas to find
an example of the Toulmin Paper