The Issue: Judge Shira Scheindlin’s ruling against one of the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk programs.
***
In ruling against stop-and-frisk, Judge Shira Scheindlin is denying the right of law-abiding citizens to be protected, which is a constitutional right (“Bloody Outrage,” Editorial, Jan. 9).
The Second Amendment allows citizens to protect themselves with weapons.
But most citizens opt for police-protection instead of self-protection.
Scheindlin admits that safety will be compromised if stop-and-frisk is abolished.
If she really believes in her interpretation of the law, then she should order the removal of the electronic screening devices used before the public enters her courthouse.
The only difference between the two is the method.
Which method do you prefer, Your Honor? The Second Amendment, or the Fourth?Elio Valenti
Brooklyn
Scheindlin’s ruling regarding stop-and-frisk should come as no surprise to anyone even slightly familiar with her brand of jurisprudence.
In fact, her decision was more moderate than might have been expected.
The true culprit here, however, is Donna Lieberman, who has hijacked the NYCLU and yoked it to her own left-wing activist extremist ideology in the same way that Al Shanker, Sandra Feldman and Randi Weingarten hijacked New York’s teachers’ unions, turning estimable if debatable institutions into political weaponry.
Robert Sieger
Manhattan
Scheindlin’s opinion and ruling forces the police to obey the laws they uphold. Nothing wrong with that.
Harassment of innocent people, false arrest and imprisonment, lives ruined by unwarranted criminal records and a corrupt system are crimes committed by bad police and judicial procedures. They will, unfortunately, go without punishment or corrective action. Peter Peirano
Ridgewood, NJ