The ten year anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks is tomorrow, and amid new threats for a repeat attack public officials are calling for increased vigilance and awareness by citizens and municipal authorities. Unfortunately, calls for such "civic mindedness" by those that are unqualified or prejudicial can have some pretty harmful effects. The renewed threat level by the federal government has prompted calls for security in public places such as shopping malls and sports stadiums to be extra vigilant; to exhibit a "heightened state of awareness" for "suspicious persons" and activities. Unfortunately, training for security guards to spot "suspicious activity" often amounts to nothing more than a training video or on the job "advice" from coworkers, and they are woefully under-equipped to actually make those judgments.  A recent investigation, by National Public Radio and The Center of Investigative Journalism, into allegation of racial profiling by security guards at the Mall of America seem to reinforce this fact.

According to the report, a two-part series broadcast on NPR's All Things Considered and Morning Edition, minority individuals shopping at the nation's largest mall were over-represented among those questioned, detained, or even reported to law enforcement under the category of "suspicious persons or activities". In one particularly illustrative example, mall security reported a man to the authorities, saying, he was "observing others while writing things down on a notepad as though he was conducting surveillance." After minimal investigation by police it revealed the man was a musician that was composing while waiting for a friend. The alleged "terrorist" felt that he had been unfairly targeted because he was black. An investigation by the Minnesota Human Rights Department concluded, "the evidence does suggest that the Mall of America "subjects racial minorities to heightened scrutiny."

Racial profiling has been a particularly hot issue since 9/11 and our generally "heightened state of awareness" as a country, often unfairly targeting minorities and particularly people of middle-eastern descent. The difficulty is in attempting to keep a public informed and aware without crossing into the territory of racial discrimination or prejudice. It doesn't help when some of our cultural and political leaders openly advocate racial or religious discrimination. GOP hopeful Herman Cain got himself in hot water over comments about "thinking twice" before he appointed a Muslim to his staff, and by proposing that communities have the right to bar construction of a mosque (he later retracted the statements). In addition, Rep. Peter King has held special "hearings" in Washington where individuals with alleged ties to extremist groups or mosques have been interrogated before a panel of lawmakers. This kind of approach smacks of "McCarthy-ism" in the Cold War era and promotes prejudicial public scrutiny. In fact, our federal government has encouraged the use of security personnel in locating and determining suspicion, many of whom are under-equipped to make the determination.

To walk the line between public safety and criminal discrimination in the way we practice "vigilance", whether a private citizen, a security guard, or a Homeland Security Agent, we need to practice objectivity in our observations. More than looking for "suspicious persons", which has been the prime directive, looking for "suspicious activities" might be a more effective goal. This is especially true with the increasing prevalence of "home-grown" terrorist, people that are just as white, or middle-class, or American in appearance as anyone else. After all, it is those "activities" we're worried about, not the inherent race or ethnicity of the person. Public health and public safety are just as well served by protecting people from terrorism as they are by not allowing prejudice and paranoia to erode our faith in one another.