Effective crime control program

To the editor:

Kudos to the homeowner in the southwest part of the valley who used his Second Amendment right to bear arms and defend himself and his loved ones ("Robber killed in break-in," Wednesday).

If more people would step up to the plate and do their own part in fighting crime and protecting themselves and their property, then these seemingly senseless burglaries and home invasions would reduce in number.

Let these previous incidents be a wake-up call to us all. These criminals don’t care if you’re home or not and they sure as hell don’t have any regard for human life, so head to the local gun store, load up on your choice of self-protection and spend some time at the range honing your skills. The life you save might be yours or that of someone you love.




Charity is voluntary

To the editor:

According to Jane Ann Morrison’s Aug. 6 column, Barbara Buckley is "considering how to get the public more engaged in health care." This is clearly a call for more government dependency and less self-reliance.

Health care is an individual responsibility. Society does not owe its citizens health care. To commit the taxpayer to the health care of another by guilt or force is unjust and unconstitutional. When the government subsidizes the individual, it is not free.

People should be bound by charity. Taking care of another when he or she is sick is rewarding. According to the late Simon Wiesenthal (Review-Journal editorial, Sept. 22, 2005), many of the concentration camp survivors suffered depression when they realized "the senselessness of their lives. They had no one to live for."

To engage society in socialized health care will have a crippling effect. The taxpayer is paying for those who cannot or will not be responsible for their own health care — just another way to redistribute the wealth.

Private insurance cannot stay in business with too many risky customers; a government subsidy cannot give the promise of affordable health care without rationing health care products and services. Yet a doctor is not allowed to give charity to a Medicare patient.

Our present health care system is so political that the last thing we need is for government to be more engaged in it.

In a free country, both compassion and health care are personal responsibilities.



Coal-fired plants

To the editor:

My wife and I are residents of the Steptoe Valley, north of McGill. We do not understand how anyone living in this area could be in favor of a coal-fired power plant in this beautiful valley.

Several weeks ago, this valley was full of smoke from a wildfire in California. This smoke stayed here for about a week, and for several days, visibility was only about three miles.

We frequently get smog from Las Vegas, and it hangs in here for days. Why would anyone want to add more pollution in this area?

White Pine County is high country, with good fishing and an abundance of wildlife. Almost daily we see antelope, deer and elk. At present we are advised not to eat fish from Comins Lake and Bassett Reservoir due to a high mercury content. Sierra Pacific and LS Power both admit that these plants will release mercury into the atmosphere. What will additional mercury and other pollutants do to the fish and wildlife in this area?

More importantly, what about people who live here? This area is over 6,000 feet in elevation and the oxygen content of the air is much lower than that of Las Vegas. Air pollution lowers the oxygen levels even more and makes it much more difficult for people to breathe while exerting themselves. Seniors and those people with respiratory problems are advised to stay inside (and may require oxygen) during bad air days. Why would we want to build coal-fired power plants and increase the number of "bad air days"?

This area is truly the land "where the deer and the antelope play." Let’s keep it that way.




Offer him supper?

To the editor:

The executive director of the Lake Tahoe BEAR League must truly be an idiot to chide people for being afraid of a 660-pound bear that was inside their home (Monday Review-Journal).

Any common sense she has must come from another planet.




Whipping boys

To the editor:

Whenever the Review-Journal has an editorial about unionized public-sector employees, it is always negative. Lately, the recurring theme is the unfunded liabilities of the pensions and health insurance for these retirees ("Public sector pension reform," Thursday editorial).

Never does the Review-Journal give the cause for these unfunded liabilities.

The truth is obvious. The government entity underfunded these programs. So why does the Review-Journal lambaste the unions? They are the convenient whipping boys for most governmental problems.



News Headlines
Local Spotlight
Home Front Page Footer Listing
You May Like

You May Like