Critic should walk a mile in officer's shoesGarland L...

the Forum

May 24, 1993

Critic should walk a mile in officer's shoes

Garland L. Crosby's May 11 letter shows that he is the typical Monday morning quarterback who knows nothing about the procedures for making an arrest under extreme conditions.

I write this as a retired Baltimore City police officer with over 26 years of experience.

Procedure is simply a general guide as to how an officer should get something done. It doesn't allow for events that are out of the ordinary. I think that Mr. Crosby has been watching too many TV police shows.

Unless you have been a police officer and have participated in making an arrest, please don't suggest.

The people who are constantly critical and inclined to judge police officers harshly should be able to ride with an officer and see for themselves if written so-called "procedures" can always be complied with under trying circumstances.

Edmund W. Huppman


Tax incentive

As the administration and Congress begin the debates regarding major revisions to our country's tax structure I would -- like to point out that several studies suggest increasing marginal tax rates actually decreases tax revenues over time.

In any case, the one issue that should simply be stipulated, before the debate begins, is that increasing tax rates is anti-stimulative. Presumably there is no debate on this point.

It should be stipulated that what our country suffers from is a serious spending problem, not a revenue problem. There can hardly be a debate here, either. If Congress is determined to raise marginal tax rates, even in the face of historical and analytical evidence that this is exactly the wrong thing to do at this point in the business cycle, may I suggest that they at least consider scheduling the increase for Jan. 1, 1994?

If many prominent economists are correct, delaying the increase will actually increase tax revenues by encouraging people to generate income now. The impact of the tax rate increases in 1994 will then carry the revenue gains into the future, albeit perhaps temporarily.

Congress should carefully consider creating this window of opportunity which will, contrary to conventional political wisdom, increase the government revenues relative to a Jan. 1, 1993, or even July 1, 1993, implementation date.

erome W. Evans


Stop testing

It was recently reported in the Associated Press that the Clinton administration is about to propose a ''compromise'' plan allowing testing of nuclear weapons up to one kiloton beyond 1996.

This would conflict with the 1992 nuclear test moratorium law which requires the president to negotiate a comprehensive -- not partial -- test ban treaty by 1996.

Senators James Exon, George Mitchell and Mark Hatfield have urged the administration to reconsider this gravely mistaken policy. Senator Exon said, ''I'm not only disappointed but appalled'' that the administration is considering this ''absolutely ludicrous'' idea. The administration plan was also denounced in a New York Times editorial of May 6.

The renewal of U.S. testing is expected to trigger the resumption of Russian and French testing and would prevent any meaningful progress on multilateral CTB negotiations. It would make meaningful progress on nuclear nonproliferation impossible, especially important as the nonproliferation treaty is due to expire in 1995.

The U.S. cannot test nuclear weapons while attempting to prevent nuclear proliferation. The nuclear ''have-not'' nations consider this stance hypocritical. Continued testing also creates potential hazardous waste sites, and costs over $400 million annually in direct costs.

The Clinton administration should convene a meeting early this spring of the five declared nuclear powers to commence immediate multilateral negotiations toward a CTB Treaty, an ideal already endorsed by the French and Chinese.

The U.S. should not resume nuclear test explosions while test ban negotiations proceed. At stake is the development of an Iranian and North Korean bomb and, ultimately, the final failure of global non-proliferation.

Joseph Adams


Report card

My son, a second-grader at Rogers Forge Elementary School, recently came home with his no-grade report card. This is his second year with this format, which I whole-heartedly support.

The controversy over this practice has motivated me to write. I feel that this is the best evaluation process for a child his age. I support it in grade levels 1-5. This format enables parents to fully understand their child's performance.

Instead of traditional letter grades, there is a detailed checklist and a descriptive narrative that tells the parent exactly how the child is progressing in the academic areas as well as socially.

We need to generate such communication between teachers, children and parents in our education process. In doing so, we can build and support individual goals for each child.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.