While the June 15 editorial "What next after end of lurking law?" reached the right conclusion, the Star Tribune Editorial Board seemed to adopt the flawed conclusions of the proponents of the repeal of the lurking ordinance. In my decade and a half as a prosecutor in St. Paul, I dealt with hundreds of lurking and loitering cases. Without exception, the suspects were urban entrepreneurs dealing crack cocaine on street corners. It doesn't require much to realize that the majority of these people were black. Therefore, it doesn't require the assumption that such cases were the result of police bias.
Analysis of the facts of the 59 percent of cases cited in the editorial wouldn't be burdensome. Were the suspects just standing around without obvious criminal intent? Did the police just swoop down on anyone standing around? How many people were arrested on warrants after being approached for lurking? But why bother with a detailed analysis when all that counts is that something is "disproportionate," whatever that really means? Without a doubt there is racial bias during some instances of police action. But the flawed conclusions reached in the analysis of the lurking ordinance is hardly solid proof.
Thomas Weyandt, White Bear Lake
• • •
The editors might want to think a little further in their defense of "livability laws." The phrase is "law and order," but while law is at least in theory neutral, order is usually imposed by one group on another.
In a June 13 article, Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek talks about a man named Robert ("Mental illness in jail: 'Society's dirty little secret' "). Robert has been jailed 31 times for misdemeanors like trespassing, vagrancy and disorderly conduct, but his underlying offense, almost a status offense, is that he is poor and messy in an area the powers that be have defined as affluent and tidy.
If the editors and those they represent want to stroll comfortably downtown, what are they willing to give Robert beyond the pain and humiliation of being arrested?
John Sherman, Moorhead, Minn.
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Resignations in archdiocese are welcomed but insufficient
The resignation of Archbishop John Nienstedt, announced Monday, is long overdue. He leaves with characteristic aloofness of "prayers for the new leadership." I pray for the countless victims of his failure to protect children.
Chuck Kundschier, Chaska
THE ENVIRONMENT
Pope, U.N. leader are setting the pace on climate matters
Long before I read the story about their Vatican meeting in the June 14 Star Tribune, I had realized the world's two greatest environmentalists were Pope Francis and United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon ("Pope to explore climate's effect on world's poor," June 14). Most interesting is the pope's concern of the effects of climate change on the poor. As one of the drafters of the pope's pending encyclical put it: "We clearly need a fundamental change of course, to protect the earth and its people — which, in turn, will allow us to dignify its people." The Vatican's scientific academy has attributed climate change to "unsustainable consumption," which it deemed "a dominant moral and ethical issue for society." To be sure, not all Catholics agree with this.