LETTERS: Judges’ sentencing a re-election tactic


To the editor:

I read with interest the article about former Las Vegas police officer Jesus Arevalo being convicted of harassment and disturbing the peace (“Ex-officer convicted in domestic incident,” Aug. 6 Review-Journal). Per Mr. Arevalo’s quote, Judge Heidi Almase “threw the book at” him, including house arrest and probation. Recall that in 2012 Clark County Deputy District Attorney David Schubert had the book thrown at him by Judge Carolyn Ellsworth for drug possession.

These two men were both first-time offenders. Schubert could have been sentenced to drug court/rehabilitation, as many first-time offenders are. Judge Ellsworth claims she needed to set an example by jailing Shubert for nine months.

It seems Clark County judges are throwing the book at public figures a lot. Could it be that election time is around the corner? Are judges flexing their re-election muscles?

What Nevada really needs to do is change its constitution to abolish the election of judges. States such as California put judges on the bench by executive appointment, which means the governor appoints judges based on excellent background and experience. Here in Nevada, judges seem to take the bench by who spends the most money or by popularity contest.

One only needs to read the Review-Journal to be aware of many past judges who were miserable failures, and some current judges who are under investigation by the state.

Appointment of judges by the governor would certainly cut down on corruption, unfairness and incompetence.

Police officers and court officials beware: judges are out to make you an example as election time nears.

TODD WHEELAN

NORTH LAS VEGAS

Israel war tactics

To the editor:

The hue and cry over the civilian casualties resulting from the Israeli Defense Force’s bombing and shelling of targets in Gaza is full of drama and propaganda. What other military force, other than the IDF, in the history of modern warfare has taken the time to warn the targets in Gaza of impending airstrikes or artillery strikes?

These warnings were delivered by telephone directly to the occupants of the structures in harm’s way, or by the IDF dropping leaflets over the area to be put under attack.

These raids are generated in response to Hamas’ delivery of thousands of rockets to any targets within Israel that they happen to hit, with the IDF also working to destroy the many tunnels that enter Israeli territory.

Those who condemn Israel for defending its land and people with strategic bombing of selected Hamas targets should read a little World War II history and recall the exploits of Sir Arthur “Bomber” Harris, a commanding senior officer of England’s Royal Air Force. Mr. Harris was responsible for the fire-bombing of the German city of Dresden, resulting in the horrible slaughter of some 25,000 civilians. Yes, women and children as well. Or maybe the orders given by our own Gen. Curtis LeMay, which instituted the low-level fire-bombing of several major Japanese cities, including Tokyo, where more than 100,000 civilians were killed, including women and children.

Were these victims given notice to flee? On the contrary, no. They were not given the “niceties” offered by the IDF, unheard of in wartime. Civilian casualties are a part of war, and the bullies who started this conflict have little or no grounds to lament the results.

MICHAEL C. MAZE

LAS VEGAS

Homes for children

To the editor:

The debate is endless as to where to send the 50,000-plus unaccompanied Central American children who have flooded across our southern border in recent months. The Obama administration has chosen to send groups of these children to random locations throughout the United States, many times not even bothering to notify governors or local officials that the children were on the way.

If the administration insists on dispersing these children throughout the United States, rather than returning them to their own countries, then send them only to cities already on record as welcoming undocumented immigrants — the so-called “sanctuary cities.”

I’m sure that ultraliberal cities such as San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, Baltimore and New York would more than welcome this influx of children (and the added local budget costs associated with them). If they’re going to talk the talk, then let them walk the walk. Problem solved, controversy over.

J.J. SCHRADER

HENDERSON

 

Rules for posting comments

Comments posted below are from readers. In no way do they represent the view of Stephens Media LLC or this newspaper. This is a public forum. Read our guidelines for posting. If you believe that a commenter has not followed these guidelines, please click the FLAG icon next to the comment.