Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In the letters to the editor published Aug. 5 about the killing of Ricky Cobb, there was an undercurrent of racism and a lack of perspective in the solutions offered for this traffic stop. This was a stop made on the basis of taillights being out on his vehicle with a subsequent discovery of a warrant for violating an order for protection. The latter is certainly a serious offense, but does it really call for the actions of these officers, who clearly seemed to escalate the stop in the video accounts?

I am a white male and I have never had to deal with law enforcement treating me as they did Cobb. If I were a Black man, I can imagine why I would feel safer in the car instead of in the hands of three angry, white, male law enforcement officers with guns.

One of the letter writers suggested that if only Cobb had complied with the officers' orders he would be alive today. Does he really believe that? Philando Castile was trying to do exactly that, and he was killed in the process. There are countless other examples of Black people trying to comply with law enforcement officers yelling orders at them to do (or not do) something. Many of them have met a similar fate as Cobb. Trying to flee makes all the sense in the world.

Again, from the video, it appears that the officers put themselves at risk by opening the car doors as they ordered him out. Why was that necessary? What about a calm, measured response that could have helped Cobb be at ease and perhaps less likely to bolt?

These are obviously difficult stops for law enforcement. The officers involved had a maximum of three years of experience. Perhaps this was a factor in how they handled Cobb. Nevertheless, we have another Black man's death at the hands of law enforcement. I pray that we stop this senseless killing.

•••

In Saturday's "Patrol has rules on deadly force," the former deputy chief of the Minneapolis Police Department said, "Fleeing is not a cause for deadly force, unless you're a serial killer." I have to wonder if the person the victim is accused of violating the protection order against would agree?

I know I'm beyond grateful officers still want to put a uniform on, knowing their actions will most likely be judged based on a political narrative/a few loud voices vs. giving them the benefit of the doubt that they felt threatened when discharging their firearm. I know I don't want to do a traffic stop like this where they stopped his vehicle, and for anyone to say it doesn't create a permanent sense of foreboding in these officers every time they leave their vehicle (PTSD) you are not being real about what it means to be a police officer.

Yes, police reform is needed to continue recognizing some officers aren't always choosing actions based on fear for their safety, and police departments aren't supporting their officers to ensure a healthy fear for safety doesn't become a danger in the field. But to keep insisting every shooting is criminal and requires swift punishment of the officer (or public shaming) means we are going to be without an officer to protect us long before the criminals are done trying to take over our cities.

We can support Black Lives Matter and still believe a shooting was justified.

Dena McDonald-Watschke, Minneapolis

•••

Did Cobb drive away from the scene of the traffic stop because he chose to, or did the car pull away because it had only been restrained by Cobb's foot on the brake, and when he was shot in the abdomen, he no longer had the capacity to press down his foot? It's a question for me because the newspaper accounts sometimes suggest the first interpretation of what happened, and sometimes the second.

Paul A. Swenson, St. Paul

The Aug. 8 story "MPD restructures in bid to build trust" would be silly if it were not so tragic. We as citizens already know that most cops are good people. We understand that there will always be "bad apples." Our mistrust has grown because we have seen the bad apples go undisciplined. How in the world can creating yet another level of police bureaucracy solve this problem? Toothless civilian oversight commissions have been ignored or abandoned over the years, and the Minnesota Department of Human Rights and even the U.S. Justice Department have found it shocking. Pretty words and empty assurances from Mayor Jacob Frey won't solve the problem, nor will two new deputy chief positions. The police department itself clearly needs policing.

•••

Don't tell us that "MPD restructures to build trust." Tell us the MPD's plan to stop killing Black people!

Sheila Wilensky, Minneapolis

•••

Regarding: "Two new deputy chiefs for Mpls." (Aug. 5): Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara has learned what we in Minneapolis refer to as "Jacob's way" — that is, to avoid decisions or responsibility for decisions by protecting yourself with layers of bureaucrats. It can get expensive, but no one likes criticism, and no one seems to be watching the budget.

Stephen A. Mayer, Minneapolis

•••

In regard to the Aug. 8 editorial, "Locate police where they're needed," I have an outside-the-box idea that might answer the short-term question of response times and the long-term question of public safety in general: Instead of consolidating all city law enforcement into five precincts, why not open small (two to six sworn officers depending on population density) community offices centered in each of the 80-plus neighborhoods within the city and 11 administrative and investigative precincts centered in the 11 city communities. Put the beat cops on foot, bikes and cars in the neighborhoods where they are needed and where that can more easily interact with the constituents they serve.

Robert Joyce, Minneapolis

I was adopted at the age of 7 months in 1951. I had an exceptional, excellent childhood because of good parents who were happy to receive me.

I felt comfortable seeking out my origins because I knew that if my inquiry was not welcome (e.g., if it would have brought pain to the those listed on the birth certificate), access would have been denied to me. That stricture seemed fair to me. Lives are complicated.

Because Republicans have shaped a Supreme Court that did away with abortion, if a woman is raped and conceives, she may have to carry the pregnancy to term. Having given that child up for adoption, she may want to put behind her a deeply painful experience and nine months of remembering it. Today, because of the legislation just passed that opens birth records, she may find herself confronted with that child years later.

This situation pits the lives of women against the lives of adoptees.

Women seem to be losing again and again in our time. That is disturbing. I wanted to know my origins, but I was grateful for a fence against hurting the lives that gave me birth.