LTE #6
DRUG INTERDICTION IS WORTHLESS: ENDING THE DRUG WAR COULD DEFUSE A DANGEROUS SITUATION

I must comment on the article titled ``The color of suspicion''
(Commentary section, Aug. 1). What was the purpose of the article?

Was it that if you are an African- American or Hispanic male, you are
born a suspect?

This is a logical conclusion that can be drawn from the context of
this article.

The article is an egregious example of hypocrisy.

The assumption is that every African- American or Hispanic male is to
be held responsible for the actions of a few. Yet, as we debate the
merits of affirmative action, white males do not want to be held
responsible for the actions of a majority of their forefathers - with
a common response being they have personally never held slaves or
discriminated against a minority.

Well, I have never sold or used drugs, so why should I have to be held
accountable for the others in this broad category of the ``classic
drug smuggler''? If the argument for racial profiling is based on the
actions of a group, then the argument against affirmative action is
moot.

I find it reprehensible that anyone would attempt to justify racial
profiling.

Until you have been pulled over and suffered the embarrassment of
racial profiling personally (as I have), you don't understand how
demeaning and dehumanizing this action is.

It is easy to spout statistics and percentages because numbers are
cold. A statistic that was noticeably absent was the number of
African-American and Hispanic males who engage in the drug trade
expressed as a percentage of the total African American and Hispanic
male population. I think the author would find this number to be
extremely low. I am an African American, college-educated, productive
member of society, and there are millions of others just like me. We,
just like any rational person, don't want to be pulled over by the
police unless we have done something wrong.

Fortunately, being born a minority male is not wrong.

RICHARD BEDGOOD
Tampa