The concept of “racial profiling” is a complex one that must be analyzed closely. The author contends that the two main elements of racial profiling are: (1) members of visible minority groups have a significantly increased likelihood of being subject to some form of police action, and (2) the increased police scrutiny of these minority groups are due to their minority status alone, rather than other differences that may warrant increased police attention. This definition distinguishes between police practices seeped in pure bigotry and those based on systematic analyses of crime patterns, intelligence work, and information from the community. Too often, critics of police practices decry racial profiling when in fact; police intelligence has led to increased surveillance of, for example, certain high-crime areas that may happen to have a high proportion of visible minority groups. Research on crime patterns has established that crime is unevenly distributed in most jurisdictions, with high-crime areas generally situated in poor neighborhoods characterized by more transient populations. If police information and analysis shows that most crime occurs in certain areas of the city, it is most effective, then for police agencies to focus prevention and enforcement efforts in these areas to protect law-abiding citizens. As such, police find themselves in a quagmire; the most effective police practices based on evidence and research may also be the same practices that attract scorn as racially motivated. Police agencies should commission independent studies to assess their own police practices to ensure they are based on criminal intelligence, rather than on racial bigotry. Note, references