Re “Why local police agencies must ban pretextual stops” (Oct. 12): Mitchelle Woodson cites a telling fact — SDPD was 23% more likely to search Black drivers than White drivers, yet found contraband less often. As a retired Sheriff’s Office commander, I see that as real evidence and an argument for finding the specific officers producing it, not banning pretextual stops outright.
A categorical ban spares departments the harder work of auditing individual conduct.
Meanwhile, the Commission on Police Practices, now floating these restrictions, has allowed Internal Affairs complaints labeled “miscellaneous” to disappear from tracking, and independent oversight still lacks officer-level data to spot patterns.
Use Racial and Identity Profiling Act data. Audit stops, searches and force by officer. Track complaint histories. Hold the people responsible accountable, not the lawful tool they’re misusing.
— David A. Myers, La Mesa
Ms. Woodson, a civil rights attorney and legal director of Pillars of the Community, a grassroots nonprofit organization in southeastern San Diego, should recognize the responsibility that comes with her professional position.
At a time when our country is already struggling with racial tensions, I believe her article adds fuel to the fire rather than promoting understanding. Pointing to racial disparities in police stops without adequately considering other possible explanations risks unfairly portraying law enforcement as discriminatory.
Police officers must be able to enforce the law without undue fear that legitimate actions will be unfairly challenged. Everyone, regardless of race or ethnicity, should be encouraged to obey the law and take responsibility for their conduct.
In my opinion, Ms. Woodson’s approach is counterproductive to racial harmony and public safety. I question whether her public advocacy reflects the constructive leadership expected of someone serving as a legal director of a community nonprofit.
— William Shen, Del Mar