The commentary "'Refund the Police', here we come" (Opinion Exchange, Dec. 18) struck a chord with this liberal city dweller. Leaders in cities across America are finally admitting that painting all of law enforcement as racist monsters, reducing police budgets and demoralizing good police officers wasn't such a good idea after all. Turns out we need the police, especially if we don't want criminals to destroy the livability of cites.

Catching violent carjackers is welcome news ("2 teens arrested, a third is sought in St. Louis Park, Edina carjackings," Dec. 18). But as we put a stake in the "defund the police" miasma of nonsense, we need to start at the beginning and tackle the low-level livability issues. Case in point: Ninth Street S. and Nicollet Mall in Minneapolis. Crowds congregate daily on this corner for no apparent purpose. They intimidate passersby, block business entrances and consume drugs and alcohol. Boisterous, threatening behavior frequently devolves into loud arguments making one wonder if a gun will be used to settle a disagreement with the possibility of an errant bullet hitting a bystander.

Occasionally all this happens under the watchful eye of police officers, but they can't disperse the crowds. In all our liberal wisdom, we struck down the loitering law because it was thought police were using it to profile young Black men. Somehow "profiling" became synonymous with "racist." Why can't we just profile behavior?

After decades downtown, JB Hudson Jewelers is closing on this corner. Across the street, Target works hard to mitigate the crowd's effect on their customers, but I wonder when it will give up and also close. Will restaurants reopen with this kind of activity outside their doors? Are we going to stand by and allow a few people make the city unlivable?

"Defund the police" and the resulting depletion of the police force sent the message to would-be criminals that law enforcement is impotent. They are emboldened, knowing fewer police officers means they can terrorize the city and chances of getting caught are small. We need to take back our city from the carjackers but also from those who make walking down Nicollet Mall unbearable. The livability of the city depends on supporting robust law enforcement. Liberals need to clean up the mess we created. Refund the police.

Steve Millikan, Minneapolis

•••

Despite the attrition of one-third of the cops in the city, the department still has 644 sworn officers. How about assigning one officer per shift to keep watch on each of these 39 kids?

David Aquilina, Richfield

The whole Kimberly Potter/Daunte Wright case boils down to the video; there are no material facts in dispute. The video unequivocally shows it was purely an unintended accident setting up the policy (not factual) question: Should people be criminally liable for their accidents? Imagine a world where the answer is no. "I accidentally drove drunk." "I accidentally put the truck in reverse and ran over your kid." You see everything would soon somehow become an "accident."

The proper answer is probably a guilty verdict coupled with a sentence tailored to satisfy the dual goals of retribution and rehabilitation with maybe some restitution mixed in. Some creativity is appropriate here. The criminal justice system probably lacks the flexibility to meet the needs of this tragic case and others like it. It, like policing, badly needs reform.

Then the question becomes: Is punishment appropriate where neither of its two most important functions (specific and general deterrence) will be met? Potter has suffered much but not as much as her victims.

Life is sometimes difficult. It would especially difficult being on this jury. What an agonizing decision to make. And maybe, just maybe, more lives (theirs) will be ruined or at least negatively affected.

A hung jury is a very real likelihood but would accomplish nothing but more agony.

A paradigm of a conundrum for sure!

Don Brown, Tower, Minn.

•••

Beverly A. Gores, Minneapolis

•••

While following the media coverage of Potter's trial, there is one statement that keeps coming up that defies any good reason to even mention: "The case is being heard by a mostly white jury."

Our legal system guarantees a jury of your peers. In this case, there are nine who identify as white (75%), two as Asian (16.6%) and one as Black (8.3%). Minnesota's population is over 80% white, around 5% Asian and around 6.5% Black. Given that with only 12 people, it would be difficult to match much closer to Kim Potter's peers than the 12 people seated.

Let's not try this case based on race, but the facts of the case. Let's hope that this jury gets it right based on the facts, not pressure from outside groups, politicians or the media.

Gerry Anderson, Forest Lake

•••

Are we ready yet to bring compassion in as an ingredient in judging and sentencing people in court? Can we believe that Potter truly mistook her gun for a Taser and did not intend to kill Wright? Can we understand that because police officer Mohamed Noor at age 5 had to flee to a refugee camp in a bus traveling only at night in order to avoid armed patrols, he might be more likely to jump when someone bangs on his car in a dark alley? Can we see that young teens who are carjacking have lost the belief that life is fair and see to it that opportunities to thrive await them, too?

None of us humans are perfect; we've all made mistakes and live with regrets. Are we ready to construct a justice system that recognizes that none of us want to die on the streets and that when that is happening frequently, as it is now, something at the very base of our plans to create a culture of safety for all of us is rotten? Yes, we are wise and experienced enough to come together to design a system that honors us all.

Orytha Svien, Minneapolis