PUBLIC FORUM.

What we deserve

Re ``Three-term losers'' (Our Opinions, Nov. 13):

Actually, I think the people of Los Angeles got what they asked for with the passage of Measure R.

They were well aware that the current City Council is one of the most corrupt government bodies in California when they voted to extend members' terms to a possible three, so now the people can live with the noncompetitive bidding such as that reported in Our Opinions.

-- Curt Redecker

Lancaster

Practical experience

Re ```Warrior' bent in LAPD'' (Nov. 12):

Your reporter quoted attorney Connie Rice and professor Erwin Chemerinsky as condemning the use of force by two Los Angeles Police Department officers on a gang member who attempted to take the gun of one or both of the officers.

Both Rice and Chemerinsky have no practical experience with gang members or the challenges police officers face on the streets. You are certainly aware that the magistrate who heard the charges against the gang member found that the force used was reasonable. His opinion, left out of your article, is more persuasive.

-- Joseph Orr

Beverly Hills 

Evangelical atheists

Re ``Got God? No way'' (Nov. 12):

So, an article now appears on evangelical atheists. I seem to remember letters to the editor from atheists claiming they have no religion. Well, Ryan Langley walks, talks, etc., like a religious duck, doesn't he?

And Langley's is a religion seeking to expunge other religions. Beware. There can be no separation of church and state with these folks. Chief Justice David Brewer, an advocate of ``separation'' speaking about the Constitution, said, ``While (separation) is often affirmed, there is nowhere a repudiation of Chistianity (in) society,'' meaning we do not have to keep Christianity out of public lives. Are we going to let atheists change that?

-- Lyndell Brown

Lancaster

You mean Rumsfeld

Re ``A new course'' (Our Opinions, Nov. 10):

Underestimating the number of troops needed, failing to provide equipment, abuse of prisoners -- after seeing the beating photo on the front page, I thought you were referring to Chief William Bratton and the Los Angeles Police Department, but it was just what I hope will be a last shot at Donald Rumsfeld. Also, when will we get back to criminals being suspects and not ``persons of interest''?

-- Rod Murray

Saugus

No more cops

Re ``No more cops for the Valley'' (Nov. 10):

Police Chief William Bratton said that he would not send any more officers to the Valley, even though there is an explosion of gang violence.

If he is only willing to send officers to clean Skid Row for the benefit of downtown developers and the new and future population of posh-downtown dwellers, then I will expect to be excluded from the new higher trash fees that have been imposed on me for the purpose of supplying the city -- this includes Van Nuys -- with more police officers. Just charge the Valley's share to downtown.

-- Cosme Dominguez

Van Nuys

Right of the wronged

Re ``$2.7 million prank'' and ``So the Dems won'' (Your Opinions, Nov. 13):

I found two of the letters somewhat confusing.

First, Bob Budworth went on a rant about ``girlie-man firemen'' and ``bark-chewing liberals,'' and then he ordered me out of his country because I may have a different opinion than he does. I'm confused because I always thought that it was our country and dissent was my right. Silly me.

Then Thomas Duran informed me that the Democrats didn't challenge an election they won. Odd, but I thought that an election was challenged only when there actually were discrepancies and irregularities. I thought -- again, silly me -- that the right of challenge went to the wronged loser. Or maybe that was the wronged winner, or -- see, confusion again.

-- Howard E. Hale

Lancaster