Criticism of York police K-9 attack reflects how many of us feel: Letters

[ad_1]

Jan. 31 — To the Editor:

Locally, as well as globally, American society has gone off the rails.

The local issue that is paining many of us now is the close-to-home violence seen with our own eyes: video of Officer Rogers versus Dr. Brennan.

Our neighbor, Kinley Gregg, wrote a column that says precisely how many of us feel. I thank her for her courage articulating her thoughts and feelings. It shouldn’t be worrying that we might fear reprisals for speaking out, but it is. I applaud Kinley’s courage.

More: Commentary: When I watched that York police K-9 video, I saw gratuitous violence

Yes, cops have a hard and often dangerous job. Yes, protocols and policies should be respected. But basic human decency and respect ought to be the part of the mission of policing.

Far beyond the moment of compliance on Dr. Brennan’s part we saw the sequence of events. Between the flashing of high beams on Dr. Brennan’s part, (a crime??) and the subsequent violent and sustained takedown of a man who did not actually pose any threat, we see Rogers and his canine “beating the s—t out” of another of our neighbors.

How and when will we come back into balance, to use reason and heart to save ourselves? Officers with a proclivity for violence should not be kept on the force.

Sally Sulloway

YorkMaine

It is unethical to keep our students uninformed about history

Jan. 31 — To the Editor:

As a young teacher searching for a job in education in the 1960s, I applied to be a substitute in Boston. I was asked to sign a loyalty oath, an oath to be “loyal” to the United States, and I wasn’t sure I should do it. (I did sign.) Now in NH, the loyalty oath is back in a different form. House Bill 1255 prohibits that any teacher advocate for “communism, socialism, or Marxism” among other provisions.

I taught high school for 12 years in Boston and Brockton, Massachusetts. While I taught many subjects ie history, English, and reading, I always thought I would be teaching some version of critical thinking. As a teacher of critical thinking, I did not advocate for any particular theory hoping that my students would learn to think for themselves. I thought it was important for my students to know about these theories, however, in order to make sense of the crazy world that we all are part of.

Story continues

That included studying the events that gave rise to racism as well. To my surprise, the textbooks had only a paragraph or so about slavery. As a former public school teacher and then as a curriculum coordinator in New Hampshire, I never thought my students had been adequately informed. I believe it is unethical (to borrow a sentence from the bill) to keep our students uninformed about these very important issues.

To members of the New Hampshire legislature, please vote against this bill.

Judy Ullman

Portsmouth

Selective reading of US Constitution leads to a biased conclusion

Jan. 28 — To the Editor:

Once again Ms. Polidura “forgot” to include the full language of the Constitution when she tried to fool the readers of her letter in the Jan. 28 edition of the Portsmouth Herald. Article 1 Section 4 of the Constitution states in full: The Times, Places, and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

“The Congress shall assemble at least once in each year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different Day.”

I wonder why she omitted that last sentence of the first paragraph of Article 1 Section 4? Could it be that it does not fit with your agenda? That part of Article 1 Section 4 was used by Congress in 1965 when they passed the Voting Rights Act to eliminate many of the Jim Crow Laws in the south that were used to prevent African Americans from voting. Is she suggesting in her letter that it would be OK for states to once again pass laws like those of the Jim Crow era? Unfortunately, that is exactly what Republicans are doing in those 30 states she referred to, and Congress was trying to use its power granted in the Constitution, Section 1 Article 4 to once again stop such discriminatory actions to disenfranchise voters, mostly minority and poor.

With regard to the filibuster, was it not Mitch McConnell and the Republicans who changed the filibuster rule to allow Supreme Court justices and other judicial nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority of 51 votes? If the filibuster is so sacred to Republicans, why did they change it for judicial confirmations? Why would it not be just as reasonable for Democrats to amend the filibuster rules to pass voting rights legislation? Are changes to the filibuster rules only allowed by Republicans when they hold a slim majority?

“You can fool some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all the people all of the time.”

Rich DiPentima

Portsmouth

If you can pay $70B for game company, you can pay your fair share of taxes

Jan. 30 — To the Editor:

Anyone looking for a good example of things going wrong in this country could take note of the following:

1. Microsoft is going to pay the sum of $70 billion to purchase Activision Blizzard, a gaming company. That’s right … a gaming company.

2. The most recent two-year budget adopted by the NH legislature is $13.6 billion.

That amount is intended to pay all of the salaries of state employees, for law enforcement, corrections, for the judicial system, child care and supervision, mental health programs, roads, highways, bridges, state parks whatever it is the state is obligated to provide by law to meet the needs of its citizens and those millions who choose to visit our state each year. That’s what the legislature has agreed to pay or, conversely, the limit the legislature has decided to impose on spending.

All of this means that in one single transaction, the purchase of one corporation by another, Microsoft is paying what is likely to be the equivalent of New Hampshire’s total expenditures for basic state services for the next 6 to 8 years. Thousands of New Hampshire citizens are struggling financially to provide even a minimal existence — rent, food, healthcare, child care, transportation — while the state continues to avoid its full responsibility for these services, at the same time cutting taxes to accommodate and benefit the Microsofts and Activisions of this world.

Does any of this make sense to anyone? Isn’t there something awfully wrong here? Whatever happened to “the American Dream?” Is it now limited to corporations with seemingly unlimited funds?

We need to start — and soon — to take whatever steps are necessary, in Concord and in Congress, to have all of those who can afford to write and receive a check for $70 billion to start paying their fair share of the costs of maintaining simple and decent lives for the vast majority of people who do not, and will never have, access to even a tiny fraction of that money.

Anthony McManus

Dover

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Column on York police K-9 attack reflects how many of us feel: Letters

[ad_2]