Featured Stories

Readers’ Letters

Just who was abusive

during protests?

This is in response to the Portland attorney and those on whose behalf he is filing the police abuse lawsuit (Protest suit to allege pattern of police abuse, April 1).

The only 'pattern and practice' of abuse I saw during the protests is a pattern of assault on public servants and vandalism of their equipment, and the practice of hindering traffic and public safety.

If you feel being pepper-sprayed is excessive, maybe you'd rather experience how police in countries we liberate treat protesters. Or maybe you would prefer the police use baseball bats and acid like some of you used on the police.

If you can't handle losing, which is really what you're protesting Ñ the fact that you lost the last two national elections and the debate on this war Ñ maybe some obedience training or Ritalin would help. I suppose the 30 percent of you who didn't get your way when the war began think that a childish temper tantrum will result in overturning the way the other 70 percent of us, as in the majority of us, feel.

Remember that in a democracy, majority rules, not the baby who cries the loudest and breaks the most toys.

Jesse Stark

Vancouver, Wash.

That's no way

to thank troops

It was bad enough when I read in my current newsmagazine that our troops are not being provided with personal care items such as shaving cream, deodorant and even toilet paper. How low can we go?

Then I learned that the U.S. House of Representatives is cutting $14.6 billion in veterans programs that cover disabilities caused by war wounds, rehabilitation and health care, pensions for low-income vets, education and housing, and burial benefits. Apparently we can go lower!

Tell the president and Congress they have to do much more. What are the men and women in the military risking their lives for, if we can't give them better support than this?

Susan Brown

North Portland

Controlled, legal meth

could get rid of crime

Your article on the Portland methamphetamine trade highlights the abominable stupidity of our failed drug prohibition policies (Meth cooks up citywide menace, April 4).

According to police, 99 percent of the property crime in Portland (burglaries, car prowls, shoplifting and identity theft) is committed by meth addicts trying to buy their next hit. Meanwhile, our neighborhoods are infested with unregulated private meth labs, requiring expensive toxic-waste cleanups at taxpayer expense.

We don't need to have these problems. A state-owned meth lab could supply free, legal meth to registered addicts, distributed through police stations so the cops could know who the addicts are. Meth addicts wouldn't be driven to crime to support their habit. Illegal meth labs would vanish, and the crime rate would plummet.

Sure, the government would be helping addicts kill themselves. Personally, I don't much care. They made the choice to snort, smoke or shoot crank, despite every law we tried to throw in their way. Let their stupidity be its own punishment.

On the other hand, it infuriates me that our property crime rate might be 100 times higher than it needs to be because our government refuses to recognize that prohibition does not, and will never, work.

Douglas Kelso

Northeast Portland