A recent letter writer has argued against a straw man: points I never made. 1. I never slandered Mexicans; I wasn’t even talking about them. Read for content. 2. I never argued that “border violence is irrational and unstoppable.” I argued the opposite. In fact, it is La Raza that argues for non-enforcement of border security, under the premise that we cannot control the border. I believe the opposite. We won World War II on two fronts after entering the game almost too late; our border can be secured if we choose to. 3. I believe “Drug dealers” is an extremely appropriate term for the people committing the violence. 4. Yes, these people are “salesman robbing and fighting each other on the corner for clients.” In fact, the kidnapping epidemic is being driven by the common practice of drug dealer mules robbing and mugging each other. 5. People who will become hitmen for food, or any other reason, are evil. They need to be in jail. Good people do not murder to feed their children. Please do not defend murder in the name of hunger. 6. I stand behind the argument that we have to incarcerate violent, murderous felons. Furthermore, we need to incarcerate every last violent, murderous felon. If we need a bigger “mop”, as the author puts it, so be it. 7. The Beckley Foundation report is about about incarcerating drug users. I never advocated that. My letter was about incarcerating drug dealers- yet another ham-handed equivocation that shows that the author can’t read for content, or even critically analyze an issue. 8. I never argued for incarcerating people on “drug charges”. I argued for incarcerating drug dealers. This is yet another equivocation that shows the author is arguing against straw men. Todd Meitzel Facilities Management