Sarbanes Strength
In a Nov. 27 Perspective article, J. Bradford Coker states his belief that Sen. Paul Sarbanes could have been defeated this year if only the GOP had fielded a stronger candidate.
The alleged extreme vulnerability of Senator Sarbanes was perhaps the greatest myth of the recent electoral season.
In 1976, Mr. Sarbanes won his first election to the Senate by defeating incumbent J. Glenn Beall by 57 percent to 39 percent.
He followed this by taking 63 percent of the vote in 1982, 62 percent in 1988, and 59 percent this year. In each of these elections he has shown political strength in all parts of Maryland.
Over the years, apparently a number of Republican members of Congress have been interested in challenging Senator Sarbanes, but none did.
I believe that they looked at his electoral strength and decided that their chances of winning were slender, so they ran for other offices.
People in Maryland like Paul Sarbanes as one of our senators. He grew up in Maryland in modest circumstances. He is intelligent, compassionate, attentive to his Senate duties and has unquestioned integrity.
Let us give Paul Sarbanes his due: he is one of the most popular Maryland elected officials in this century.
Reed Hutner
Baltimore
Bashing Males
I was struck by Sara Engram's column about Judge Thomas Bollinger's handling of the Gillette case ("Judges Just Don't Get It," Nov. 20).
In the article, Ms. Engram said readers can be forgiven if they are a little hazy on the details of the case, referring to the public outcry when Judge Bollinger sentenced Gillette to probation before judgment on a charge of second-degree rape.
Actually it is Ms. Engram who is somewhat hazy on the details of the case. Most of the jury members who were queried after the trial agreed with the judge's sentence, including the female members of the jury.
As a matter of fact, several jury male members and one woman jury member in particular said that they did not see where Gillette had really done anything wrong but found him guilty only because his act fell into the descriptive context of the law.
This tells me that it is probably a bad law. The consensus is that a woman can wake up the morning after a bad night and say, "Hey, wait a minute, that's not what I wanted to happen," and a man must go to jail for 20 years for what he construed as a mutual encounter.
This law makes a man responsible for a woman's irresponsible behavior. Feminists should try this defense in a drunk driving case where someone gets killed . . . .
I am certainly for administering the maximum penalty to rapists. But we cannot administer justice with injustice.
Law enforcement agencies say that 50 percent of all reported rapes are dropped before they go to court. The reason is that the women were just trying to get even with some man.
In addition, the prospect of a large settlement can also stir the imagination of some women. All I've got to say is thank God that these women are in the extreme minority and good women are in the vast majority.
I'm all for protecting our women against rape and other sex-related crimes. But like these women's lives, I believe that the lives of our young men are too valuable to be taken for granted, something that these feminist groups are overlooking . . .
The fact of the matter is that Ms. Engram and these other feminists just don't get it.
Our society has a lot of problems, and these problems are only going to be solved by working together. To continuously come on as a male-bashing extremist only further strains relationships in a society that needs all the bonding it can muster.
Richard Hertz
Owings Mills
Transit Connections
I can relate to the Dec. 4 Perspective article about the problems with public transportation in Baltimore.
We have buses, subways, commuter trains and light rail, but they do not interconnect. It is easy to go downtown but very difficult to go anywhere else.
I live in Reisterstown, only a few miles from the Owings Mills Metro station.
I needed to go to Washington one day and decided to take public transportation.
I drove to the Owings Mills Metro station, waited 10 minutes for a train that I rode for 20 minutes to the Penn North station. Then I waited 15 minutes on a North Avenue street corner for a bus.
I stood for 20 minutes on a very crowded bus that dropped me off at the corner of North Avenue and Charles Street. From there I walked two blocks to Penn Station, arriving just minutes before the MARC train that I planned to take was leaving.
For my return trip I decided to try a different route.
I took the train to Camden station. There I waited 15 minutes for the light rail.
I traveled the light rail for only five minutes, getting off at the Lexington Market stop.
It was now after dark, and it was not clear in which direction I should walk to find the Lexington Market Metro station. Fortunately I was able to ask a transit policewoman. Once at the Metro station, I waited another 15 minutes for a train back to Owings Mills.
All of the problems getting around Baltimore are in sharp contrast to the ease of getting around Washington, where there is a Metro stop in Union Station.
When I arrive in Washington, I simply exit the MARC train, wait no more than five minutes for a subway train and can quickly be in almost any part of Washington.
By the way, I don't even think of using the Metro to get to my job at Loyola College. I would either have to go all the way downtown and then take a bus back up Charles Street or make several bus connections.
In many ways Baltimore's poorly planned public transportation system mirrors its poorly planned expressway system.
Interstates 83 and 70 and the Baltimore-Washington Parkway all lead into the city but don't connect with each other. They simply end.
City planners need to realize that Baltimore is a large city with people living and working in many different places. Downtown is not the only destination.
Joseph Ganem
Reisterstown
Bullet-Proof Vest Bill Should Not Be Ridiculed
In his Dec. 8 column, Peter A. Jay commented on a recent bill introduced by the City Council President Mary Pat Clarke, concerning the sale of bullet-proof vests.
On behalf of the 3,000 men and women who serve Baltimore City as police officers, I wish to applaud the efforts of Ms. Clarke in trying to deal with a problem that threatens the safety of every officer in this city.
The bill introduced by Ms. Clarke does not seek to ban the sale of bullet-proof vests but rather tries to ensure that these vests are sold to law-abiding citizens and not the criminal element.
When violent criminals have access to bullet-proof vests, it further enhances the potential of injury to our working police officers by neutralizing the officers' ability to defend themselves with deadly force when necessary.
This bill simply requires that purchasers of bullet-proof vests be authorized by the police commissioner to purchase such a garment for a good and substantial reason.
It is the very same concept that the Maryland State Police utilizes to determine who shall be given a handgun permit for carrying a concealed weapon on the streets of our city and state.
Under these circumstances, I cannot understand why Mr. Jay has a difficult time with this worthwhile piece of legislation that other jurisdictions should seek to emulate.
Mr. Jay should don the uniform of a Baltimore police officer and walk the violent streets of this city for a brief period of time and perhaps he would reconsider his mockery of Ms. Clarke's legislation.
I would also like to see the General Assembly enact legislation requiring an enhanced criminal penalty for those persons wearing a bullet-proof vest during the commission of crime of violence.
If we had more legislators who were as dedicated as Mary Pat Clarke to the safety of police officers and who were willing to sponsor legislation to try to make these officers' jobs safer, we just might not have to attend as many police funerals during the coming years . . .
Gary McLhinney
Baltimore
The writer is president, Baltimore City Lodge No. 3 of the Fraternal Order of Police.