Armed, masked agents are a problem

Todd Lyons, the acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, thinks that people are “offended” by the masks that ICE officers and agents wear because they don’t like what immigration enforcement is (“Immigration official defends tactics against criticism of a heavy hand as arrests rise nationwide,” June 2).

This is not the case.

In civilized countries, law enforcement officers wear nametags and numbered badges. This offers the populace some measure of accountability and contributes to the expectation that officers will perform their legal duties in keeping with their own departmental policies and within the boundaries of the law.

People who live in dictatorships have no such expectation. Many live with the fear that a knock on the door by faceless armed men means they will be “disappeared” or simply killed outright with no attempt at due process. Such men can do as they please with no limits. After all, how can any excesses be reined in if no one knows who they are? And why should they play by the rules if they know they can violate the law and remain anonymous?

If ICE’s acting director is truly concerned for the safety of his operatives, perhaps he should study the practices of metropolitan police departments nationwide to learn how they have dealt with this issue for over a hundred years. Many of the uniformed men and women of the Baltimore Police Department, to cite just one example, serve every day in potentially lethal operating environments without the luxury of wearing a mask while they work.

Acting director Lyons is mistaken in thinking that the American people object to masks because of what ICE does. They object because — regardless of their feelings about ICE’s mission — the government should not be sending armed, masked men to carry out its objectives.

— Steve English, Clarksville

Maryland Democrats sabotage GOP

In his supercilious letter to the editor, “Why Maryland doesn’t have a Republican governor” (June 1), reader Glenn Gall has the gall to claim that the reason Maryland lacks a GOP governor is because Maryland Republicans preferred Del. Dan Cox.

Actually, it is because the Democratic Party completely controls the state of Maryland and undemocratically gerrymanders election districts to cement that control. Gall also conveniently omits the fact that during the last gubernatorial campaign, Democratic groups spent millions to promote Cox over former Maryland Commerce Secretary Kelly Schulz, a more viable pick for statewide office.

This underhanded, undemocratic tinkering with the other party’s primary robbed Maryland voters of full choice and of a more serious debate of issues by the party’s nominees. The letter writer’s smug verbiage may play well in one-party Maryland, but nationally, Americans seek a more collaborative, less agitational approach to political dialogue and reject arrogant, elitist insults spouted by some Democrats.

Such smugness and insults likely contributed to the party’s loss of the White House and control of both chambers of Congress last year. Any buyer’s remorse there?

— Ron Boone, Timonium

No compensation for Wells Fargo customers?

In the article published on June 3 in The Baltimore Sun, “Fed lifts restrictions placed on Wells Fargo in 2018 because of its fake-accounts scandal,” Wells Fargo CEO Charlie Scharf is quoted as saying, “We are a different and far stronger company today because of the work we’ve done.” Scharf also announced that each of the 215,000 employees at Wells Fargo would receive a $2,000 award for turning the bank around.

What about their long-term clients who hung in there throughout the fiasco? What is their reward?

— Patricia Miedusiewski, Timonium