What are Metro officers so afraid of?
To the editor:
Let Las Vegas police union reps reverse the situation and then examine their decision to not participate in the new inquest process ("Officers seek halt to revised inquest system," June 22). Have the families of the victims of shootings had their civil rights denied or trampled in past inquiries? Only recently have they had any hint of representation.
What do these civil servants have to fear if they have done no wrong? Their insistence on non-participation in the process sheds a dim light on an already dark and shady agency that seems to operate in a justice system with double standards. As a taxpaying citizen, I suggest that it would be only fair to give those officers the option to resign before firing them.
What kind of agency allows officers to refuse to cooperate? An inquest is not a trial. Let those officers go and find other sources of employment. Maybe there are some security agencies out there that would hire them.
Officers, where is your confidence in the justice system that you so righteously uphold when you make an arrest? Just stand up and tell the truth and you have nothing to fear if you have done your job.
Does the blue shield have any influence on your decision to skirt the justice system?
Ben Harris
Las Vegas
Nanny state
To the editor:
A new Nevada law will prohibit hand-held cell phone use while driving. In keeping with the desire to advance the cause of safety, we can look forward to further laws that will prohibit the following while driving: smoking, eating, drinking, coughing, sneezing, singing, whistling, humming, listening to music and, of course, talking to the passengers.
Oh yeah, using any hand to operate any controls (lights, wipers, A/C, etc.) other than the steering wheel will also soon be illegal.
James Moldenhauer
North Las Vegas
Heavy lifting
To the editor:
Our elected leaders are having problems solving our economic woes. I have four suggestions.
First, the Department of Energy was created to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and has failed. Close it down.
Second, the Department of Education was created to improve student achievement, and it, too, has failed. Close it down.
Third, the U.S. Postal Service was to have paid its own way and has not. Let FedEx take it over.
Fourth, the IRS code is a joke. Close it down and go to either a flat tax or a consumption tax.
These four ideas would save us a kazillion dollars. Why do I have to do all the heavy lifting?
I'm not going to hold my breath awaiting these changes.
R.A. Salter
Henderson
No stake
To the editor:
On the continuing debate about the wealthy not paying their "fair share" of Social Security taxes, I have to comment on Edward Hayes' Monday letter.
Mr. Hayes says the wealthy just don't get it and must accept an additional burden even though 50 percent of our working population doesn't pay income taxes at all.
Most people feel that everyone should have some burden and pay some income taxes, and that when you exclude such a large part of the voting population from paying for things, then of course it will be common nature for them to want more services that others pay for. Somehow, Mr. Hayes and so many others can't see that simple understanding in economics.
A great working example is the fact that, in 2007, California was facing a huge deficit that turned out to be at least $10 billion, and the voters at the end of 2006 voted for $19.9 billion in spending on rapid transit. The majority of voters, it seemed, didn't care as to the costs because so many don't pay income taxes in the state and aren't even concerned with the thought of balancing a budget. The deficit for California ballooned to $17 billion in 2008.
With more and more services going to the 50 percent of the working population that pay no income taxes, it certainly encourages people to show less income on their returns, also. How many times have we all heard the statement, "The bill for that service is $100, but give me $80 cash"?
Don't get me started on the free lunch and breakfast programs. I came across a person with a fancy car and a genuine Rolex watch who was actually proud that his kids got free food at school. That is appalling to me. It is encouraging the next generations to a feeling of entitlement.
Don C. Whitaker
Henderson
Pell Grant
To the editor:
Education is the key to a better future for Nevada. Yet at this moment Congress is determining whether to further limit access to higher education by cutting student aid by $2,500 per student. This represents a cut of almost 50 percent. With record tuition hikes here in Nevada, it's no surprise that we have the worst unemployment rate in the country.
I plan to graduate this spring, but my future is unsure because I rely on the Pell Grant to help me achieve my dreams.
Education allows our best and brightest to realize their utmost potential. If the Pell Grant is restricted, we won't be able to access education, limiting our opportunity to strengthen our economy and better our state.
I urge Sens. Harry Reid and Dean Heller to stand with Nevadans. Protect Pell Grants from cuts to ensure a great future for our citizens.
Aimee Riley
Las Vegas
The writer is student body president of the College of Southern Nevada.
