Can you imagine not doing that? Can you imagine leading your life not evaluating people you see? Liberals say you ought to. Now, little kids are that way. They crawl into strangers' laps, say anything to anybody, and can't even distinguish male from female. (Some liberals think that's a good thing, too.) Indeed, one of the things you have to do as a parent is teach little kids to evaluate people. You know, so they can stay alive. First, you teach them to distinguish strangers from people they know and behave differently to the former, i. e., don't talk to them or trust them. But liberals, who are against profiling, very frequently use ignorant children as some sort of ideal that we're all to aspire to. I've heard over and over that little kids don't notice racial differences, but are all kum-ba-ya, so we shouldn't notice them either. (Actually, studies have shown that even babies damn well notice racial differences, so that's another liberal mantra that continues despite proof to the contrary.)
So it's ignorance piled upon ignorance. Profiling is just knowledge, experience, and logic, and the left hates all three things. The left is powered by emotion and dogma, and facts the left dislikes are called, no kidding, "hate facts." How Orwellian is that? Just google "hate facts" and see what you find.
So to be against profiling is to be in favor of ignorance, stupidity, and never learning anything from experience. This is more or less the official policy of the MAG (Media, Academia, Government), all the way from being against "profiling" non-citizens and not letting them vote, to poor old George Zimmerman trying to defend his neighborhood from thugs.
I'm getting into a rant again, so I direct you over to calmer, cooler Steve Sailer, who asks if there's anything more to say about profiling. The comments on his post are well worth reading.