To the Editor:

In his Jan. 1 Guest View "The Sin of Moral Equivalency," Dr. Arthur Garrison poses the hypothetical question of why justice would have been assured for the two slain New York City police officers, should their shooter have survived, and then he answers "because the value of the lives of the officers was not open to discussion."

In contrast to this, he claims "in cases of a black man killed by the police, an assumption is made at the outset the black man must have been doing something that resulted in his own death."

While, I agree historically blacks have suffered great injustices, it is divisive and inflammatory to suggest the current justice system is stacked against black men based on a few isolated incidents of perceived police brutality.

To make a cogent argument, the logic of facts and statistics needs to enter the picture.

According to statistics published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 1999-2011, 2,151 whites died by being shot by police compared to 1,130 blacks. (Data on fatal injuries: homicides by legal intervention).

Wait, you may say, that is not a fair comparison as whites outnumber blacks in the U.S. by a lot – whites compose 63 percent of the population and blacks only 13 percent, according to the 2010 census.

However, it is also true blacks are involved in a much higher percentage of violent crimes.

Unfortunately, many public officials and leaders of public opinion choose to play on emotion and self-interest to promote a movement or cause.

In truth, anyone can cherry-pick a statistic or a specific case, which supports his cause.

The media are ever-willing contributors, adding bias and fuel to emotional arguments.

While in his final paragraph, Dr. Garrison voices criticism of implied moral equivalence exhibited by both the demonstrators and the supporters of the police, the underlying theme of his piece is biased, anecdotal and divisive.

Pat Kottke

Upper Macungie Township