Let’s have discussion about armored vehicle

Dear Editor:

Perhaps there is a way to discuss/diffuse the current concern about armored vehicles being used at peaceful protests vs. where massive firepower is needed.

Ulster County Executive Pat Ryan, opposed to the vehicles, and county Sheriff Juan Figueroa, in favor, both make valid points. Ryan has the experience of wartime use of these vehicles, while Figueroa has a desire to protect the men and women of his department and residents.

It seems to me that there is a need for guidelines. The use of these vehicles can be to strike fear as opposed to any tactical need. Would a reasonable person agree that during a terrorist event or a mass-causality shooting that these vehicles are useful? I think so, and there certainly are other necessary uses. Would an equally reasonable person agree that having an armored vehicle at a march across the Mid-Hudson Bridge is an overuse? Again, I think so. It is good that it has become an issue so we can discuss it.

Can we show how grown up we have become and set guidelines that are not lines in the sand, but a reasonable approach about when they may be needed at a scene or not? I believe we can. Discussing issues and rational positions can accommodate both sides, if we try. Right now, it looks like a standoff at the OK Corral. And I am so sick and tired of standoffs across this country.

Let’s not have Ulster County be part of the OK Corral. The players are respected and respectful persons. I’m sure there is a solution.

Rick Jones Kerhonkson