My wife and I, like millions of viewers worldwide, watched the Miss Universe contest. We were appalled by the horrible way that it ended. How embarrassing for the pageant and for the contestants, but most of all for Miss Colombia. She was crowned, bannered and given flowers, only to be told in a most embarrassing way, in front of the world, that she was not Miss Universe. And how awkward Miss Philippines looked and felt while the crown and banner were removed from Miss Columbia and placed on her instead. No matter how much host Steve Harvey apologized for his error, there is absolutely no excuse for that ever happening. As a retired Twin Cities broadcaster, I found his excuse not professional in the least. He had the cue card in his hand with the correct information, yet made the verbal error. Not Miss Colombia's fault, not Miss Philippines' fault; Steve Harvey's fault. He should never be permitted to emcee the pageant again. There are many professional people better qualified to do so, and I would urge the pageant committee to move forward in selecting someone better next time.
Morton Garren, Minnetonka
• • •
The main problem with beauty pageants is they don't know how to count. They count: winner, first runner-up, second runner-up, etc. First runner-up sounds better than second place. Then again, maybe we should all count like that. Saying that the Minnesota Vikings were first runner-up four times sounds much better than saying they were four-time Super Bowl losers. In a feel-good society, we should only have first runners-up. New counting system: winner, first runner-up, first runner-up to the first runner-up, first runner-up to the first runner-up to the first runner-up, etc.
Dan Kirk, Edina
BLACK LIVES MATTER
There was an inconsistency in the group's position on protest
Black Lives Matter Minneapolis has maintained that the Mall of America owes it a platform for protest. It has claimed this despite the mall's status as private property. Protest organizers have argued that by pursuing a restraining order preventing planned trespassing (an order upheld in part on Tuesday by a Hennepin County judge), mall management had somehow infringed upon free-speech rights.
Consider this. Black Lives Matter Minneapolis maintains a Facebook page that it uses to rally support for its cause. Comments raising reasoned concerns about the intersection of free speech and property rights have been deleted by the group, and certain commenters have been blocked from posting. Naturally, Black Lives Matter Minneapolis retains every right to moderate comments on its Facebook page. But isn't it hypocritical when a group that lays unauthorized claim to private venues in the name of "free speech" denies a platform of its own to others? If the Mall of America owed Black Lives Matter a protest venue, didn't Black Lives Matter owe the same to anyone who opposes its views? Or does this version of "free speech" only work one way?
The essence of property is access control. If you own a thing, you control who gets to use it and on what terms. Black Lives Matter clearly exercises such control over those things that it deems its own. Why doesn't it, in turn, respect the property claims of others?
Walter Hudson, Albertville, Minn.
The writer is vice chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Minnesota.
TERRELL MAYES INVESTIGATION
It seems like a powerful gun must have been used
Wait! What kind of gun was this, that "a stray bullet" can penetrate the walls of a house? (" 'Who wants to tell me … they killed my child?' " Dec. 22.) Was the army shooting the day 3-year-old Terrell Mayes was killed? How can such armaments be available for nonmilitary use? What a conundrum. Oh, wait. The NRA says that's protected by the Constitution. Poor Terrell and his family. I guess it just can't be helped.