Readers Write: Minneapolis leadership and gun violence, the Legislature, Jan. 6 commission

In addition to the terrible shock of 22 children struck by gunfire in 2021, I was angered to learn in the article "Innocents caught in the crossfire" (front page, May 19) that a very successful program to break cycles of violence, Blueprint for Action, is not being funded properly. How is this possible?! It is absolutely infuriating. The strategy to connect young people with mentors to help them "unlearn the culture of violence" makes perfect sense. The program received national recognition and was cited by former President Barack Obama as a model for addressing youth gun violence. The statistics showed it was reducing gun-related assault injuries among young people.

There is no excuse for this program not being fully operational. Our city officials need to answer for this. Their focus should be on measuring, with data, what programs are working and making sure they have the money they need. Otherwise, it's time to remove those officials from office.

What can be done to halt the gun violence that plagues Minneapolis and that brings such heartbreak and pain? Two separate articles in Wednesday's Star Tribune provided a lot of information and raised a lot of questions.

"Police and health officials say most of the shootings have some sort of gang tie," states the first article. Further, it notes that the city had a fairly successful youth violence intervention program for several years. However: "The program has fallen off course as funding dried up for recreation centers and after-school programs."

This suggests two things: First, that gang culture has to be confronted and addressed directly, in a multifaceted way. Moreover, it raises the question: Why has the successful Blueprint for Action program faded away? Some new version of this program needs to be a top priority.

The second article, about a North Side news conference held by City Council members Jeremiah Ellison and Phillipe Cunningham ("Violence a 'crisis' on North Side," May 19), provided insight on one reason (among many) that city progress on this problem has been so slow. We should salute the Rev. Jerry McAfee for showing up, stepping forward and putting these two council members' feet to the fire by saying, "We need y'all to get the rest of the City Council members and get with the mayor — whatever that thing is y'all agree on, merge that stuff before the end of the week." In other words: WORK TOGETHER.

Nobody claims these problems are easy to solve. And everyone should understand that we are all responsible. Police reform is absolutely necessary. So is a spirit of fairness, justice, equality and inclusion, so that all city residents have a chance to thrive. But petty bickering and political maneuvering by council members and city bureaucrats only makes things worse. The little emperors have no clothes.

I am so angry. Children being shot in north Minneapolis should bring out equal or greater outrage to Black men being shot by the police. During the Chauvin trial we saw military vehicles and the National Guard stationed in Uptown to keep windows from being broken — yet we don't we see that in north Minneapolis to keep innocent lives from being taken? Where are the protesters, national civil rights leaders and lawyers to stand with those families? Gov. Tim Walz, Mayor Jacob Frey, you should do better! You are proving that Black lives don't matter to Minnesota.

Two questions for all Minnesotans and legislators who oppose the Minnesota omnibus environmental bill (" 'Clean cars' impasse puts environmental aid at risk," front page, May 19): Who do you know who has had strokes, ischemic heart disease, cancer (leukemia, lymphoma, lung, brain and others), chronic lung or kidney disease, fertility issues, developmental disabilities or neurodegenerative diseases like Parkinson's or Alzheimer's? All of these conditions increase with environmental degradation and pollution.

What is your justification for opposing primary prevention of these conditions and environmental health planning? Nearly everyone agrees that rising costs for supportive services are undesirable. Our society will be hobbled by the economic fallout of reduced worker viability and health-related costs without the proposed environmental protection. The current omnibus bill is a step in the right direction.

The writer is a retired physician.

My representative in Congress, Pete Stauber, gives plenty of lip service to being supportive of the police, highlighting his years as an officer. However, when it came to standing up for the officers who protected his life and the lives of his staff and others, he turned his back on the Capitol Police by voting against the Jan. 6 commission ("Unanimous no from Minn. Republicans," front page, May 20).

Thus it is clear where Rep. Stauber stands: pro-insurrection, anti-democracy, anti-accountability and anti-police.

Dignity, truth and responsibility: Minnesotans believe in these values, which are free of political affiliation, creed or color. Why, then, did Minnesota's GOP representatives vote against a commission to establish the whys and wherefores of the Jan. 6 attack on our U.S. Capitol?

I am of an age to remember the Warren Commission investigating the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Of course, someone could claim political motivation for that investigation, but its result helped refute many of the wild hypotheses about why Kennedy was killed. The 9/11 Commission helped us understand multiple aspects of the attacks in New York, Washington and the airplane crash in Pennsylvania. We benefited as a country from knowing more about these significant, traumatic events.

On Jan. 6, 2021, we saw live videos of the assault on our Capitol. Was it instigated by inflammatory rhetoric from the White House? How did militias influence the attack? Did the attack have support from staff and elected officials within the Capitol? How were active or retired military or police officers involved? How did social media platforms influence those who chose to march on the Capitol? Could earlier attention to public statements about the veracity of our national elections have influenced the actions of those who marched on the Capitol?

These are important questions and just a few of the concerns about Jan. 6 that Americans should pursue. They are not associated with any political party.