Today’s society lacks sense of duty
I share Andre Jackson’s nostalgia for times past (“When the past seems familiar,” Opinion, Dec. 20). My generation did truly see our share of travails and challenges, but they seem to have been more manageable than today’s, likely due to our acceptance of reality. There was a sense of duty to family and friends that to me is now lacking. If what I see reported is true, a large percentage our citizens are carrying the load for a nearly equal number of citizens who do not contribute enough to the privileges offered to all of us.
I like Celestine Sibley’s contribution of old truths that were printed with others on your page of remembering. Her column in 1965 spoke of an old farmer whose credo included how to “take-a-holt” of an unhandy task. I think it boils down to more of our citizens taking hold of their lives and living in a present, responsible time — not beholden to what’s presented by Hollywood-style tripe that encourages violence and disrespect for almost everything we of past times hold dear.
JACK FRANKLIN, CONYERS
Bias is blatant in cop shooting story
The article by Brad Schrade and Jennifer Peebles (“Unarmed, shot in back: police never charged,” News, Dec 20) is by far the most biased piece of reporting I have read in quite some time. The statistics and accompanying comments by the reporters are presented in such a way as to heavily influence the reader and to cast a “racial” pall over the entire subject. They fail to mention the reason so many blacks are involved in these police problems is that a significant number of blacks put themselves in confrontations with police. The skin color of the criminal has very little to do with an officer’s reaction when his/her personal safety or life is on the line.
BOB GRAYSON, CUMMING
Article shed light on one-sided justice
Thank you for your continuing coverage of fatal police shootings. As someone who sat on a Georgia grand jury that heard one such case, I can attest that all the “evidence” presented favored the police while simultaneously demonizing the decedent. Moreover, we were rushed through deliberations to move on to a full docket of other cases. My experience left me shaken and shocked at the level of injustice displayed by the system. I hope your reporting will educate future jurors about the one-sided nature of the grand jury process, and incline them to let these cases move forward to trial, where the dead will have a voice.
ROBERT WOLFSON, MARIETTA
