Whose rights?
In “Taking the FIF” (August 14), Jack Bradigan
Spula presents statistics that, like all statistics, leave unanswered
questions. For example: “The NYCLU report shows that drug activity
accounts for 55 percent of FIFs; no other ‘context’ accounts for more than 10
percent.”
And
[quoting SUNY Brockport professor Eileen O’Brien]: “‘Drug use data
consistently show that whites use drugs much more than African-Americans do,’
she says, ‘but it is young African-Americans who line the jails on drug
charges.’ O’Brien notes police can more easily make arrests in crowded,
intensely surveilled urban neighborhoods.”
The numbers
may be accurate, but I don’t think they address the instinctual and emotional
issues of the people who live in the neighborhoods plagued by in-your-face drug
use and violence.
Consider
what we see on TV in the days following the shooting of a young black male.
First, we’re shown angry family members who say the action was racially
motivated. Then, after the dust settles a few days later, we are shown
clergymen and groups of parents in the neighborhood who say the culture of
violence must be stopped. To me, the voices of these parents deserve the most
attention.
Most of us
will never know what mandate the police have been given in certain
neighborhoods. Part of the mandate may be granted privately, as it should be. I
have a theory that there are official mandates, from police headquarters, but
that these are, by necessity, blended with mandates from outraged citizens.
As a
parent, I can make a pretty good guess about the mandates in some
neighborhoods. If my kid couldn’t play outside without wearing a bulletproof
vest, and I had information about who was carrying the guns, my mandate to the
police would be very simple: “Constitutional what? For who?” In other
words, carte blanche.
If I’m
correct, the police may be giving citizens exactly what they asked for, and are
taking a lot of flak from the press in return for their efforts.
Ask any
parents who have ever had nightmares about their children being in danger: The
instinct to protect our children takes priority over the rights of someone
walking around with a supply of heroin and an illegal gun.
Doug Kanter, Irondequoit
Jack Bradigan Spula responds: I
agree that “instinctual and emotional issues” take over when people, especially
parents, react to neighborhood crime. That’s only human. Been there myself. But
beyond the immediate need to shield citizens from violence, the police, courts,
legislatures, et al., have a responsibility to find a middle path between doing
nothing and doing whatever the public’s instincts and emotions seem to demand.
Compare the
dynamic of capital punishment (and here I don’t imply FIFs are anywhere near
that level of seriousness). Many people who’ve seen a loved one murdered
naturally scream for blood. But that doesn’t mean the state has to deliver. On
the contrary, the state must insure that all parties — victims, the accused,
the public at large — get justice without damage to civil rights and
liberties. And this principle covers everything from life-and-death
determinations in court to the most mundane, routine actions of cops on the
beat.
Loving ‘Checkout’
I am writing about Jon Popick’s review of “Checkout” (August
7), by local producer Mark Foggetti. I am left wondering if I have
misunderstood Jon’s point of view, if he understands what makes a movie fun to
watch, or if we caught the same film.
Jon states
that the story is conventional and humdrum and that it wouldn’t hold the
attention of non-Rochesterians. I totally disagree. I found the film to be
light, fun and just what I needed to take my mind off of some of the stresses
of the times.
Jon says
that the local celebrities and locations were so important to Rochesterians
that they were the film’s only big pull (for locals). Well, I am a local and I
didn’t know any of them, or care about that aspect of the film at all. Would
Jon say the same thing if the Golden Gate Bridge were mentioned in a film made
in San Francisco?
He then
comments about the movie’s predictability. Well yeah, most romantic comedies
are just that: predictable. Audiences expect a comedy to be predictable. They
aren’t there on assignment; they just want to have a good time. Which directly
relates to Jon’s attempt at business math (when he states that the financial
premise for the store was glaringly out of whack). I didn’t do the math; I just
wanted to be entertained!
I was entertained, and I would like to see
the film get its just rewards.
Anthony Marotti, Park Avenue, Rochester
Rockin’ GMC
Thanks for the article on 90.1 WGMC (“Smokin’ Signal: WGMC
Comes of Age,” August 21). In my opinion, it is the best station in Rochester,
and I’m glad that Jason Crane and the rest of the DJs are getting the
recognition they deserve.
I began
listening to Dave Moskal’s “Muskie’s Juke Joint” about five years ago
and began to stay tuned to the station as corporate radio grated more and more
heavily on my nerves. All of WGMC’s DJs are very knowledgeable and excited
about the tunes they play, and in turn I am, too. I was actually surprised to
learn that most of the listeners are in the 55-75 age demographic. I am 26 and
find a lot of the songs pretty rockin’!
I hope your
article inspired more folks to tune in.
Robin Annlot, Greece
Don’t mess with our parks and libraries
Are we being “led” by maladroit politicos who hire inept
accountants as their strategic advisors? Two areas hacked apart by the county
bludgeoner’s ax are especially distressing: libraries and parks. Libraries are
the heart of true democracy, necessary for the common person to obtain
knowledge and the means of applying it, at very little cost per use. They are
bastions of freedom. They are job headquarters.
Certain
special-interest concerns could perhaps be routed to private-sector
philanthropists and philanthropic groups. Libraries, however, are “general
interest,” important to every person in Monroe County.
And if
libraries are the heart, our parklands are the lungs of our democracy. Parks
are used daily by people from every social strata: Olmsted historic park lover,
nature worshipper, jogger, dog walker, beachcomber.
Our parks
are already operating at bare-bones expense level. Parklands were set aside
long ago and were designed to be continuously maintained to a generally high
standard. It is not possible to have responsible stewardship with the proposed
cuts in the county budget.
A short
time ago, the county executive set forth the idea of jobs and the creation of
new sectors in industry. How the devil are you going to keep good, educated
workers happy without a great outdoors and great culture?
If
necessary, invent a new tax category and apply it to a portion of every
real-estate transaction in the county. Both libraries and parks should be
managed fully. The word to the budgeters: Don’t mess with our public lands or
our libraries.
Michael Kopicki, Park Lane Drive, Webster
Taxes help children
I am very concerned about Jack Doyle’s proposition to cut
funding to Child Protective Services and Family Services of Rochester. The
latter gives children and families psychological counseling that is unavailable
to them otherwise — including counseling for children who are victims of
sexual abuse.
Early
intervention after a child has been raped or molested helps that little boy or
girl to emotionally survive and make sense of what has happened to him or her.
It also helps families understand how to support their kids when the
unthinkable has been done to them. These are usually poor kids, whose families
cannot afford to seek counseling elsewhere.
As for
Child Protective Services, I have made calls to their offices on occasion, and
I understand that they are already overwhelmed and over-committed. To cut
county funding from these programs would be a gross injustice to the children
of our community.
I can think
of only one reason why vital services to children would be the target of the
cuts: children don’t vote. But adults do. And we care about our kids. I can
think of nothing more important than our children’s safety and sanity. Cuts
have to be made elsewhere, not at the expense of our children.
And
incidentally, raising taxes is an
option. Our elected officials have become far too fearful of verbalizing the
need for community support of our children. I believe that the majority of
residents of Monroe County are people who care. I believe that Jack Doyle is
one of them.
Consider
just one child in pain: a neighbor’s child, or a child you once saw in the park
or on a bus or in a store. Most of us would consider a small tax hike worth the
cost to alleviate the hurt of that one child. And yet how many more children
these programs help!
For the
sake of his neighbors and all of our children, I hope Doyle rewrites the budget
his office has proposed. We all know that these kids need our support.
Barbara Deitz, Averill Avenue, Rochester
More on Regan
Your report on Clare Regan (August 7) is a gem, surpassed
only by the special lady herself. More could have been said, particularly about
her modest beginnings, a story in itself.
In
addition, more could be said about her generosity, particularly in terms of her
sharing the vast amount of information that lies in her head. When asked a
question in the area of criminal justice, she will usually respond instantaneously;
otherwise, she will research it and get back to the questioner ASAP.
A toast to
a good friend and colleague who enriches the planet just by being here.
Margaret
M. Stinson, Fayetteville
A higher power
The letter in your August 14 issue, by the man who describes
himself as a “recovering alcoholic and addict,” caught my eye. I think he is
onto something with respect to a “power greater than one’s self.”
At one
time, I would have pooh-poohed this concept, but I have changed my mind. I am
not religious and tend to be intolerant of most organized religions. However, I
have seen the works of this outside power enough times to feel that its
existence has been proven to me.
I don’t
know what to call such a power, but I suppose God or Allah is as good a
name as any. (My wife calls it “reality.”) I have heard “god” referred to as
“good orderly direction,” and I think that describes it well. I don’t
understand this outside power, but I don’t have to. I only have to accept the
opportunities it gives me to improve my life.
Why it
works, how it works, and where it might be located are immaterial. I believe
this power presents us with opportunities, and if we accept them, our lives
change for the better. If we don’t, we remain as we were. Whether it will provide
us with vast powers or wealth is a question that, like the others, I can’t
answer.
The problem
as I see it is that we let petty intolerance to various religions influence our
lives in such a way that we disregard this power or refuse to allow mention of
it in our daily lives. By so doing, we lose sight of this marvelous force and
begin to think we can or did do it all by ourselves.
A man told
me once that I could pray for anything, and if I really believed, my prayers
would be answered. Again, I don’t know; I believe that prayer is useful to
prepare out minds to accept the opportunities when they are presented and not
let them slip by.
I would be
interested in hearing other people’s thoughts in this regard.
Bill Benzing, Alexander Street, Rochester
That was then
I recently received a flyer in the mail — proudly
proclaimingthat it was paid for with US taxpayer dollars, no less (so
much for the GOP rhetoric on “fiscal restraint”). In it, my
Representative, Tom Reynolds, told me about his recent fine efforts to crack
down on corporate crime.
Thank you,
Mr. Reynolds. But at the risk of seeming ungrateful, allow me to ask you one
question. When Mr. Clinton tried to enact similar protections several years ago
– before it was politically
convenient to join this bandwagon — why did you and the rest of your GOP
cronies vote to block these measures? Was it lack of foresight, or simply lack
of concern? Or maybe you were just trying to “protect the economy.”
None of
these answers seem particularly satisfying, do they?
Seth Perry, West Henrietta Road, Rush
This article appears in Sep 4-10, 2002.
