Quote Rev. Bayes till you're blue in the face, but profiling amounts to holding a group responsible for the actions of bad individuals.
edit: Here are some studies. I would have put them in a reply but I'm being rate limited. Any one is sufficient on its own, but all are interesting.
http://www.unz.com/article/race-and-crime-in-america/
http://2kpcwh2r7phz1nq4jj237m22.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-c...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10940-011-9134-...
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289611...
http://www.jstor.org/stable/591624?seq=1#page_scan_tab_conte...
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609...
HN is not the place for this.
Not for spreading "The Bell Curve" 90s research and unsourced white nationalist propaganda.
You use technical terms like "sufficient" and "replicated", as though you actually understood how science worked, but then link to a pile of crap scholarship published in third-rate journals by cranks and racists. It's annoying. And dangerous. Worse, you appear to be completely unaware of the distinction between correlation and causation, and what policy implications that has. Kindly get a clue.
They actually do correlate to race, beyond that which income accounts for, but you'd kind of expect that if law enforcement was racist against blacks and was perceived as such: policing is less effective in black communities both because of police attitudes toward blacks and vice versa. (Racial profiling—literally law enforcement targeting people based on race—obviously exacerbates this.)