Reading Los Angeles: Join The Times' new book club
Opinion Readers React
Readers React

No to military equipment for cops, yes to cameras in patrol cars

To the editor: Saturday's front page included an article about the increased militarization of U.S. police departments alongside the one about the inability of the Los Angeles Police Department to install cameras in all patrol cars. ("LAPD's in-car camera effort is lagging," Aug. 15)

Billions of dollars' worth of military weaponry, including assault rifles and armored vehicles, is donated by the Pentagon to any police department that can pick up the equipment; yet some departments can't afford the relatively few millions it would cost to put video cameras in their vehicles.

What is wrong with our military budget when we can afford to give away usable weapons and equipment? Why can't the Pentagon order fewer vehicles and guns so the federal grants that would fund patrol car cameras could be more substantial?

The accountability for both police and civilian behavior provided by the patrol car cameras might help alleviate the need for the militaristic policing of our communities.

Susan Talbot, Los Angeles


To the editor: Is a person who is attempting to take an officer's gun from him by force a threat to the officer such that deadly force in response is justified? For most people, this is a rhetorical question. ("Ferguson, Mo., and L.A.: Two police shootings, one common thread," Editorial, Aug. 14)

Initial reports on the shooting of Ezell Ford by Los Angeles Police Department officers contend that Ford was trying to take the officer's gun. It's bewildering that The Times contends those facts are simply an officer shooting an "unarmed man." It's also worth noting that there is no constitutional right to resist a lawful arrest.

Per department policy and law, deadly force can be used to stop a threat to an officer's life. So, let me answer The Times' apparently non-rhetorical question:

"When a person attempts to take an officer's gun from them, no matter their physical or mental condition, we should expect an officer to respond accordingly to save his or her own life — and that likely includes the use of deadly force."

Tyler Izen, Granada Hills

The writer is president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League.


To the editor: Clearly our mental health system is broken when law enforcement is the first responder to mentally challenged people.

It is vital for law enforcement at all levels to be properly trained to interact with the mentally ill in a way that is both safe and effective. These interactions are inevitable and should not result in injury or death to either party.

The recent incidents filling the news these days where mentally ill people have been beaten or killed should not be accepted as unavoidable. Law enforcement is there to protect and serve everyone, even irrational and troubled individuals.

Please think of these troubled individuals as someone's loved one — a parent, a child, a human being. Surely there is a way to deal with these situations without it escalating to extreme harm or death.

Denise Frey, Santa Barbara

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • LAPD's in-car camera effort is lagging
    LAPD's in-car camera effort is lagging

    The Los Angeles Police Department this week found itself in a familiar place: defending a controversial shooting by officers that has led to conflicting accounts of what happened.

  • DWP owes ratepayers an explanation of nonprofits' spending
    DWP owes ratepayers an explanation of nonprofits' spending

    To the editor: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power General Manager Marcie Edwards' response to the city audit, asserting that it was "littered with accusatory innuendo and peppered with contradictory statements," was a slough-off job and not a rebuttal of the innuendo and contradictory statements....

  • Police vs. the public

    To the editor: After reflecting on almost 40 years in various aspects of the criminal justice system, including more than 15 years on the Juvenile Court bench, I think Father Gregory J. Boyle has identified the problem — the perception of those caught committing crimes or arrested by police as...

  • Abortion advice and the law

    To the editor: Being averse to abortion is one thing. But for crisis pregnancy centers, or CPCs, to lie about its possible drawbacks — such as a supposed link to breast cancer — is quite another. ("Going undercover at crisis pregnancy centers," May 1)

  • Why Cornel West was a bad choice for a UCLA event

    To the editor: The article "Some Jewish activists don't want Cornel West at UCLA conference" misses the essence of the debate over Cornel West speaking at a UCLA conference honoring Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel.

  • Gov. Brown strikes a blow for climate science
    Gov. Brown strikes a blow for climate science

    To the editor: The reverberating power of one single state finally doing the right thing to address the most critical and urgent threat to humanity cannot be underestimated. Gov. Jerry Brown has thrown down the gauntlet, challenging other politicians of conscience to follow. Even Pope Francis will...

  • Extending Prop. 30 taxes wouldn't address systemic problems

    To the editor: George Skelton is right when he says California's current tax structure is too volatile and in desperate need of an overhaul. Extending temporary tax increases has become all too common in Sacramento, and it doesn't surprise me that some government officials would like to extend...

  • More female firefighters: Don't force it, Mayor Garcetti

    To the editor: Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti wants more of the city's firefighters to be women, a difficult goal made clear by the fact that the four women in this year's training class have been eliminated. ("Second straight LAFD recruit class is all male after women exit," April 29)