Opinion: The targeting of certain suspects makes sense

Before we talk about racial profiling, we should define it so that the left doesn't throw it around in defense of their beloved minorities whenever it pleases them.

Racial profiling like racism means persecution solely on the basis of racial hatred. How does this fit the so-called racial profiling along the New Jersey Turnpike? As I have read in the Times, blacks are more often the sellers of narcotics and whites are more often the users. Sellers have to transport their wares from thither and yon to where it is needed. It makes perfect sense, then, for police to stop, not all blacks as the Times editorial failed to point out, but some black types and others the police have come to recognize as probably transporting narcotics.

To further show how corrupt this editorial's thinking is, it claimed a random search would also turn up "some" narcotic carriers. Beware of weasel words. Of course it would turn up some. However, it would turn up very few, whereas targeting suspects turned up 30 percent.

The police know something else the Times also failed to mention: that narcotic traffickers send out cars devoid of drugs that they know will be targeted in order to lessen the chance of traffickers being caught.

A 30 percent arrest rate is well worth the effort. Not to the Times, for whom coddling minorities is more important than enforcing the law.
-- Francis J. Sullivan, St. Petersburg

If the profile fits

Re: Glaring abuse against minorities, letter, Dec. 29.

My son has traveled to the Caribbean many times over many years. It has become a standing joke about how every time he returns to the Miami airport he is singled out to get in the "search" line. He was told one time that he simply met the profile.

My son is a 6-foot, blond, blue-eyed white male with a neatly trimmed beard.

All I can say is if there are profiles that may be helpful to stop drug carriers, etc., then no matter what color their skin is, if it helps put drugs off the streets, then so be it.
-- Judy Oliver, Largo

Law enforcement limits needed

I couldn't agree more with the Dec. 30 editorial, Unwarranted "drug war" tactics. The Delta Task Force anti-drug squad in Manatee County, the Rampart Division in Los Angeles and the on-going Aisenberg trial, are clear evidence that checks and balances for law enforcement need to be in place.

The vast majority of police officers are law abiding, honest citizens, but the drug war and the lure of easy money has corrupted a countless number of law abiding, honest citizens -- including police officers.

To disallow a suspect's attorney from deposing the investigating and arresting officers before trial would be a travesty of justice that would further erode civil liberties and confidence in law enforcement. Law-abiding police officers who do their job within the legal guidelines of the law should not have a problem answering a few questions from a defense attorney before trial.

As someone who is experienced with thermal-imaging cameras, I must agree with the editorial's view of them. These cameras are imprecise tools, and the images they produce are open to a police officer's interpretations. With these cameras, officers could literally peer through concrete walls and watch a husband and wife making love. To use an instrument this powerful without a search warrant would clearly be an invasion of privacy and unconstitutional.

To the citizens who are willing to grant the government this kind of unbridled power in the fight against illicit drugs, I have one thing to say: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Rick L. Meredith, Tampa

Dealing with drugs

Re: Unwarranted "drug war" tactics.

Simple drug use and possession should be tolerated, as in the Dutch or Canadian models. Drug problems (read: addiction) are health problems, not criminal justice issues. Jails are not equipped for treatment of addiction.

Fully funding a drug court would just dump more tax dollars into the criminal justice system and continue to entrench the culture of incarceration. Using the Florida National Guard as a police force is rather disturbing and Gestapo-like. How long before we must show our identity papers at the checkpoint?
-- Chris Howard, St. Petersburg

Suicide not a willing choice

Re: A fool's errand, letter, Dec. 30.

I was pleased to see patrols doubled on the Sunshine Skyway as a suicide watch. Anyone who has served in law enforcement, counseling, human services and mental health clinics can tell you a suicide is not a "willing" choice.

I was called on a suicide when I was in an investigative position. She was a young woman who was alone during the holidays. She took an overdose of sleeping pills. I firmly believe this once beautiful woman -- she was 26 and loved life -- was a victim of a vicious depression.

The letter writer would be better served by learning about the demons of depression before leaping to conclusions that suicidal people are "eager and willing" to die.

One more thing: The suicide doesn't stop with the person who dies. It will affect remaining family members, loved ones, co-workers and a host of other caring people, who will wonder what went wrong.
-- Dolores Incremona, Tampa

A plea for highway safety

Re: Teen dies when her car careens into tree, Dec. 28.

I was deeply saddened to read about another young life being lost before it had truly begun. I can only imagine what her family and friends must be going through. It is a most sorrowful tragedy to have to endure.

A family friend said to hold your children close "and say "I love you' every time they leave the house." Good advice -- but please, dear parents, go at least two steps further and instill in them the importance of observing the speed limits and driving carefully. This is a crucial part of their safety and a preventive measure to help them arrive at their destination and get back home again safely.

Speed limits and other road signs are there for our safety -- not because the Florida Highway Patrol has so much extra money it has to find meaningless ways to spend it.

Please, drivers, slow down. Drive safely, observe the rules of the road and arrive alive.
-- Marie E. Law, New Port Richey

Alabama lawmakers could help

The custody quandary of "Baby Sam" continues. One avenue of resolution has yet to be brought into play -- the Alabama Legislature.

The issue in every state revolves around two principles: namely, the "rights of biological parents" opposed by "the best interests of the child." The lower courts moved to a decision on behalf of the child's right (which is paramount in most every state). The Alabama Supreme Court stayed with the early case law favoring biological precedent.

In the late 1970s, the law in New York state seemed to be that all a biological parent needed to show in order to prevail was a "flicker of interest" in the child. At that time, as a surrogate judge in Steuben County, N.Y., I was faced with that issue and decided the case in favor of the child. The decision was appealed.

While the case was on its way to our highest appeals court, I received a call from a New York state senator. He took my decision and, with assistance from other legislators of a similar philosophy, converted it into statutory law. A child's best interests became the state's legal standard.

The best interests of the child are currently the decisional basis in almost every jurisdiction. No longer do we live in a country where almost all our children are the product of two parents married and committed to a traditional family. The casual way in which children innocently arrive in the most precarious circumstances calls for different priorities.

As Abraham Lincoln said, "When our case is new, we must think anew and act anew."

It is inconceivable that a brief moment of sexual urgency can dictate a child's future, considering the circumstance of conception and the commitment offered by the adoptive parents to the welfare of that child. The Alabama Legislature should step forward on behalf of this child and children now unborn.
-- M.E. Tillman, former state Supreme Court justice (7th Judicial District, New York), Clearwater

Remember discrimination against Jews

Re: Not all Jews are liberals, letter, Dec. 28.

The letter writer says that Jews have little in common with African-Americans. How quickly he forgets discrimination in hiring and college entry, as well as facing segregation in housing and being taunted and teased. This is not to mention being victims of murder due to the accident of birth.

As to Jesse Jackson's remarks about New York City, he uttered those mean words in the late 1980s. He's made every effort to rectify his unfortunate remark, which was made in a private confab with friends (one of whom was an African-American journalist who felt compelled to report it). I wonder if the writer would want every word he has said in private about African-Americans printed in the St. Petersburg Times.
-- If most Jews are liberals, it is because of our life experiences and long, tragic and triumphant history.
Rosalyn Estrin, Port Richey

Common experience created a bond

Re: Not all Jews are liberals.

I reject the position of a recent letter writer downplaying Jewish/African-American relations and disputing the liberal bent of the Jewish body politic. Both peoples carry the scars of human bondage, inhumane treatment and discrimination solely based upon heritage. Both share strong religious and cultural imperatives that society must respect and care for the well-being of all its citizens, even the least among us.

From a common experience of exclusion and disenfranchisement arose between them a bond in charitable works and the fight for civil rights. Their attraction to liberalism flows from a shared belief of utilizing government for the public good. Classic liberalism traditionally professes this people-rather-than-business orientation.

As for slurs, ingrained prejudice lurks in all quarters to be condemned universally. While unfortunately, relations between these two groups have been better, dismissing the link between Jews and African-Americans entirely due to ill-advised words from some of the latter's spokesmen is thoughtless at best if not itself racist. So much for good will to all this holiday season.
-- Jan Andrew Press, Palm Harbor

Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They also can be sent by fax to (727) 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

For e-mail users: Letters can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com. E-mail messages must be text only and cannot include attachments. If you're using a word processing program to write the message, you must use its "Save as'' function to save it as a text file, then import it into your e-mail program. Please include your return e-mail address, as well as your name, mailing address and phone number, in the text of the message.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page