Letter to the editor: Reality check on family separation, police & protests |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Reality check on family separation, police & protests

Since public discourse has descended into mindless emotionalism with little regard for facts, a “reality check” seems to be in order:

1. Although it is unfortunate and sad, it is often necessary and appropriate to separate children from parents who have committed a crime; this is especially true if the parent in question committed a crime with their child in tow.

2. In Tennessee v. Garner, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the police are authorized to use deadly force against fleeing felons they deem to be dangerous. Example: A suspected ax murderer fleeing from the police may be viewed as dangerous even if he does not have an ax on him at the time.

3. People do not have a constitutional right to block streets and highways; these actions infringe on the rights of others and pose a public safety risk.

Race is irrelevant to the above observations — just sayin’.

Donald Liddick Jr.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.