Racial Profiling at Checkpoints

The Sept. 10 commentary pleading, “Don’t Close Checkpoints, Update Them,” shows gross ignorance of the evils of racial profiling. The commentary acknowledges that agents often stop people at checkpoints based on their race, but argues that this is nothing more than nationality profiling, and that if Sweden, China or Congo were across from our border and were the origin of criminals and illegal aliens, the agents would be detaining people who looked like they came from those countries as well.

The vital point being missed here is that it is both wrong and unconstitutional to stop people due to the color of their skin. Even if some persons of any given race might be the source of crimes and illegal entries into the United States, the vast majority of the members of that race are law-abiding and innocent. Exposing all Hispanic persons to detention and investigation because some might be illegal aliens or smugglers perpetuates stereotypes and fosters discrimination.

Delays to motorists at Border Patrol checkpoints may well be reduced through modernization. But racial prejudice is clearly a far more intractable problem.

ALEX RICCIARDULLI

Los Angeles

*

Closing Border Patrol checkpoints because smugglers are avoiding them reminds me of the town that took down a “Dangerous Curve” sign because there hadn’t been many accidents since they installed it.

SHERWIN COGAN

San Clemente

*

Stating anyone “could cross the border as they wished,” a letter writer (Sept. 11) repeats an often-spoken misconception that the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo provides for an open border.

Ain’t so! A reading of the treaty at any library will show only provisions for then Mexicans in the U.S. to voluntarily transfer to Mexico and Americans to return to the U.S.

DON MANNING

Los Angeles

*

The Sept. 10 editorial, “Immigration Challenges,” is right on when it states that neither presidential candidate has presented an integrated immigration policy. Unfortunately, the proposals set forth in the editorial would greatly increase an already overburdening number of immigrants. We need to reduce immigration rather than expand it.

If the U.S. continues the present policy of million-plus annual immigration, the high-end Census Bureau population estimates will reach the half-billion mark by mid-century and over a billion by 2100. This is equal to the current population of China. This continued population explosion will subject future generations to vastly overcrowded schools and hospitals, gridlocked highways leading to urban sprawl and water and air pollution. Since immigration is the one controllable factor in the increase of our population, we should heed the warnings of the Commission on Immigration Reform, which suggested a reduction in immigration to 550,000 a year.

BYRON SLATER

San Diego