How does blocking traffic protest police violence?

To the editor: Could someone please explain what specific goals the protesters responding to the non-indictment for Michael Brown's killing in Ferguson, Mo., are trying to accomplish with their demonstrations in Los Angeles, Oakland and many other cities? ("Bay Area train service restored after Ferguson protest shutdown," Nov. 28)

I understand the desire to protest unpopular policies or actions; I participated in such protests myself. When we took to the streets in the 1960s to protest the war in Vietnam, we had a specific goal: to make Congress vote to end the war. In response, President Johnson chose not to run for reelection. Eventually, the war ended.


Those who disagree strongly with the grand jury's decision not to indict former Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson are as frustrated as we were 45 years ago, but I don't understand how blocking traffic in multiple cities shows that "black lives matter" or how it will reduce police shootings of young black men.

Daniel Fink, Beverly Hills


To the editor: As tragic as the events in Ferguson were, even more tragic is the destruction of property by the very people who live there or found it necessary to travel there to burn and loot then return to their untouched neighborhoods. All this fury is being fanned by the 24/7 media reporting on every protest in every city across the country.

It is time for sanity and peace, especially at this time of year, to prevail.

Susan Greenberg, Los Angeles

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion