resulting in continuous traffic stops, fines, etc. and the legal framework for the funding arrangements for principalities in these states. In sum, the police departments and other law enforcement agencies were directly funded from the monies from these traffic tickets and other criminal fines. Thus, there was a considerable added incentive for targeting Afrodescendants. In fact, between 2012 -2014, African Americans accounted for 85% of all vehicle stops, 90% of citations and 93% of arrests in Ferguson, Missouri, a place now infamous for allegations of racial profiling and killings. Another current example is the way in which the legal framework has embraced notions of excess in terms of policing by combining anti-terrorism with ordinary law and order functions. In many cases in the Americas, anti-terrorist laws have been used for so called regulation of ordinary protesters with the full understanding that the typical protestor is in fact a minority, such as an indigenous person protecting land rights. This is an expansion of what should be a civil law framework into the most dangerous and oppressive realm of the criminal law and constitutes a violation of several principles of international human rights law, including rights relating to movement, liberty and principles of proportionality. The Commission has spoken out against this trend and recently, the Chilean government abolished the use of anti-terrorist laws for this purpose. Laws which permit wide discretion to use force are also shown to be inherently discriminatory in societies where there are already set negative stereotypes of minorities fuelled by generations of inequality. This is so whether we are speaking of laws which concede such power to ordinary citizens, such as in Stand your Ground laws, a form of self defence, or legal norms on the use of force by the police.