In defense of the pie perpetrator
Re “Pie surprise, mayor’s response on camera” (Page 1A, Sept. 24): Just when we thought Kevin Johnson was behind the movement to quell excessive force in the Sacramento area, he get assaulted by a pie, and he reacts by subduing his attacker and gets assistance from his security guard.
If the attacker had brandished the pie, instead of surprising his victim from behind, he may have been shot to death.
I am not advocating the use of pies to make a social point, because it can lead to dangerous self-protection, nor smashing pies on the faces of our leaders, but really, what is obvious in The Bee’s photos, is the use of excessive force.
Jose C. Estrada, Woodland
Mayor should not have hit back
Police officers are scrutinized for use of force. Any officer found to be using excessive force is subject to termination, if not prosecution. Mayor Kevin Johnson, a critic of police use of force, beat and hospitalized a man for throwing a cream pie in his face. Will Johnson be held to the same accountability as his rank-and-file police officers?
Scott Tramell, El Dorado Hills
KJ’s pie assailant had a point
Pie thrower Sean Thompson didn’t hurt anyone, didn’t damage property, or call for a riot. He slapped a cream pie in the face of Mayor Kevin Johnson, who has spent his term abusing his power.
That pie will stick to this mayor’s face for the rest of his life. But charging Thompson with felony assault because he wanted to call attention to the abuse and mistreatment of the most vulnerable people in our society is itself an attack on decency and democracy.
Adam Bearson, Sacramento
How to spend Facebook money
Re “Facebook CEO, wife fund effort to end all disease” (Page A8, Sept. 22): A few weeks ago, while on a cleanup along the American river, a teenager scooped up human feces.
On NPR, a scientist made the observation that human waste contaminates the entire world to such an extent that we are fighting a losing battle against disease unless we get ahead of our public health crises.
Maybe Facebook’s billions would be better spent on providing places for people to use sanitary facilities.
Judi Williams, Davis
People need more end-of-life options
Re “‘Right to try’ bill offers false hope to the desperately ill” (Viewpoints, Sept. 23): We can look at the “right to try” bill through two lenses. One is to view as a weakening of the FDA by giving terminally ill patients false hopes and depriving them of the right to sue.
This would be true if there were no mutual agreement with the FDA to achieve an expedited path for compassionate use; to define ways in which patients could retain their insurance; and to engage the FDA or an independent regulatory board to make sure patients’ rights are preserved.
In the second lens, the right-to-try bill could give terminally ill patients hope. They would be well-informed, grant consent, have their rights preserved and have a regulatory board that protects them.
I am for passing this bill, provided that it is done to protect the rights of the patients.
Reem Al Olaby, Sacramento
Dying people deserve choice
A person has the right to self-determination and informed choice, especially at the end of their life when options have been exhausted. Society should advocate for such legislation to support the right to try.
Death may be delayed if treatment is available and barriers are eliminated for access even without documented efficacy. People must have choice in a democracy.
Carol Shaneen, Roseville
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.