On seatbelts, road work, Afghanistan and more
To the editor:
My mouth dropped open at the responses of our sheriff, in the aftermath of a terrible car accident that left one officer dead, to questions about officers wearing seat belts Doug Gillespie needs to have a meeting with the officers to discuss the need to wear seat belts? Gee, I thought it was the law.
Then a retired police union representative said no one ever asked him to wear a seatbelt. Asked him? I thought it was the law. He said it would be too inconvenient with all the gear the officers wear. So if I'm wearing a linen suit that I don't want to wrinkle or a heavy coat that would create a bulky "inconvenient" condition, I don't have to wear my seatbelt?
Sheriff Gillespie also said it's not easy to change attitudes and customs. So if I get pulled over and I'm not wearing a seatbelt ... which is the law .... I can claim I just haven't had time to adjust yet? How many years has it been?
Do we need any more evidence that the police think they are above the law? It's astonishing that the sheriff would respond this way in a public forum without a hint of embarrassment or shame, without an inkling of how shockingly arrogant and ignorant his answers are.
What happened to setting an example? We have truly lost our way, America.
Mary M. Campbell
LAS VEGAS
War effort
To the editor:
Bob Jack's Friday letter concerning the war in Afghanistan raises interesting questions as to why we now face the predicament of possibly losing a war we had almost won.
Mr. Jack is right on two points. We did well at first, and now we are not. However, he tries to lay the blame on the present administration, evidently agreeing with the "dithering" comments made by ex-VP Dick Cheney. Let me set him straight.
George Bush, to his credit, started the war in an effective manner. Within just a few weeks after the 9/11 disaster, he dispatched small numbers of Special Forces teams, CIA operatives, and other clandestine forces into the country to track the al-Qaida leadership, including Osama bin Laden and the Taliban that supported them. These small groups of warriors, reinforced by a few battalions of Airborne troops dropped into strategic locations and supported by the extremely precise and devastating use of dedicated air power soon had the Taliban on the run.
They came very close to capturing or killing bin Laden, until some questionable decisions by mid/upper echelon commanders allowed him to slip out of Tora Bora and into the Pakistan border regions.
The foolish and unwise invasion of Iraq soon doomed the Afghan war. The invasion resulted in the immediate shift of effort, and more importantly, resources to the new theater. That meant the Afghan war went to the back burner and the warfighting materials required to sustain the Afghan effort were diverted to Iraq. The man-power, helicopters, vehicles, artillery and all the rest of the beans and bullets required to fight a war were now headed for Iraq, and the few assets we had left in Afghanistan were left to whither on the vine for the next seven years. This has allowed the Taliban to essentially reconstitute and reorganize their forces and they now are once again a powerful force.
This was a decision made by Mr. Bush, not Mr. Obama. For the right wing to now try to blame Mr. Obama for the possible losses, when the blame sits squarely at the feet of Bush/Cheney, is hypocrisy at its worst.
Don Shirley
LAS VEGAS
Credit due
To the editor:
John L. Smith hit the nail on the head Tuesday with his column, "Reid must show he's more than thoughtful son of a political powerhouse." I heard about Rory Reid's "virtual crossroads" plan last week and downloaded a copy. I've never seen more said about the state of our state. Certainly not by the current governor.
Mr. Reid's ideas carry meaning; and he should be thought of as more than the son of another politician. He obviously put a lot of work and thought into the plan he has unveiled. He deserves the credit Mr. Smith gave him for putting his name on the line.
Jeff Raithel
LAS VEGAS
Road woes
To the editor:
I read the Wednesday Review-Journal article, "Beltway project at issue," dealing with the awarding of a county contract to complete the stretch of beltway between Tenaya and Decatur. I live at the junction of North Jones and the beltway, so you can probably understand my frustration regarding this morass that has been created by the commissioners and the contractors.
As a taxpayer and one of many users of this stretch of dangerous highway, I am greatly concerned by the suggestion that these highway funds be diverted to other projects, especially since the delays can be directly attributed to the commission's inability to come to a decision. I question the board's justification for favoring the highest bidder, Las Vegas Paving, whose bid exceeded Fisher Sand and Gravel by $4.6 million.
The commissioners also violated the terms of the bidding process when you accepted the appeal of Las Vegas Paving, who missed the deadline to appeal by one day. In addition, the board's initial decision completely ignored the recommendation submitted by Clark County legal staff.
I find it interesting to note that the area in question, Tenaya through Decatur, sits on the fringe of Larry Brown's district before entering the district which Tom Collins represents. It is also noteworthy that Mr. Brown has successfully completed the beltway for the west side (Summerlin) and that Mr. Collins has successfully found a way to have the stretch of highway on either side of Aliante Parkway completed early. I guess those with influence are able sway the commissioners, leaving those on the "fringe" to deal with a very unsafe situation indefinitely.
If, as stated by Public Works Director Denis Cederburg, this stretch of highway only gets about a fifth of the traffic as the southern portion, I question the need to accelerate the completion of the stretch at Aliante Parkway. Understand, now that the Aliante stretch has been completed as well as the Tenaya overpass, we are left with several miles of beltway that are not divided.
This includes two areas of roadways that have sweeping curves that change in elevation, increasing the danger of head-on collisions. Regardless, drivers still drive at speeds equivalent to freeway speeds and the occasional police speed trap does not alleviate the danger.
Funds dedicated to the completion of this project should not be diverted to the southern area or any other area. The commissioners should stop this apparent bickering, abandon their personal biases and obvious political affiliations, and make a decision so that we as taxpayers will be able to drive safely in our neighborhoods.
Stephen M. Linen
LAS VEGAS
