Observer Forum: Letters to the editor 10.16.15
Exclusion zones would target blacks
In response to “CMPD to move forward with exclusion zones” (Oct. 13):
Exclusion zones would be a tragic backwards step in response to the known racial inequities in policing and the courts.
Being arrested can be a common occurrence for some folks depending on where they live and what they look like.
Creating these zones could needlessly exclude fathers, sons, brothers, mothers, daughters and sisters from our homes and communities.
I would rather our city adopt people-first policies that build on the restorative justice and economic resilience measures that are already happening to treat the causes of arrests and crime at the root.
Danielle Hilton, Charlotte
Seat belts on city buses a no-brainer
In response to “Seat belts on city buses not required” (Oct. 15):
We are required to wear a seat belt in a car, yet the Federal Transit Administration does not require them on CATS buses.
The video posted with this article shows people flying across the bus.
One woman got up clenching her shoulder. One man seemed to be thrown against the door. Eight people were taken to the hospital.
This problem must be addressed in the proper form – by adding seat belts to CATS buses.
Noah Rackowitz, Charlotte
Kudos to mom who acted on public cross
In response to “Cross helps kids learn about one another” (Oct. 15 Forum):
A cross has no place on a public structure. This was part of a public playground, not a church.
This has absolutely nothing to do with teaching kids to “accept the differences of others.”
Kudos to the mom who was sharp enough to see that the cross didn’t belong at a playground and was proactive enough to have it removed.
Practicing your religion should be covert, not overt.
Lenore Kerner, Charlotte
Admit it, Sanders is gaining ground
In response to The Ballot “Grades for the Dem debate” (Oct. 15):
I disagree that Hillary Clinton was the obvious winner of the debate.
Informal polls on news sites and social media are finding Bernie Sanders has a serious lead over Clinton in some states. Sanders also was searched more in hours after the debate than any other candidate.
Clearly, he is an extremely viable national candidate and the public seems much more supportive than you suggest.
Clinton may be a more household name, but Sanders’ arguments on social, economic, and environmental fronts have gained much more support and praise.
Ash Warren, Charlotte
I applaud Berry’s approach to job
In response to “Skeptical of rules, Berry aids business” (Oct. 13):
This article says Labor Commissioner Cherie Berry “prefers to coax company owners to comply rather than punish them when they don’t.”
This was meant to cause outrage, but for me it represents exactly what I think Berry should do!
Much of the problem of our economy today has to do with government believing its overriding goal is to work against American businesses, so more and more burdensome rules are enacted.
When the objective is merely to punish businesses, you not only hurt the owners of business, but also their consumers and employees.
Mark Padfield, Marvin
Berry should resign; isn’t doing her job
In response to “Berry does a great job protecting workers” (Oct. 14 Forum):
Forum writer Richard Vinroot is wrong! The decline of workplace injuries over 15 years is only a part of Cherie Berry’s job, and the decline is the result of many factors, not just her.
Berry is there to protect people’s rights. She is not doing this because she doesn’t “like” all the regulations.
She is an example of the worst kind of public official and should be ashamed of her record. She should resign.
Michael A. Watson Sr., Charlotte
Labor series presents a distorted picture
Labor series presents a distorted picture
This series leaves out critical features of wage and hour law that result in a distorted picture.
Both federal and state wage and hour law provides for double damages and employer-paid attorney’s fees and costs to claimants who prevail. Also, both state and federal law provide for individual liability of employers.
Claimants are not lacking remedies in cases with merit.
Philip Van Hoy, Charlotte
This story was originally published October 15, 2015 at 6:17 PM with the headline "Observer Forum: Letters to the editor 10.16.15."