Pin looming depression on Harry, Nancy
To the editor:
I would like to go on record and thank our elected representatives in Washington, with special recognition to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, for doing their best to push our country into a depression.
Why is it all right to explore and drill for oil everywhere but in our country? Our country and our people have done very well through the years by producing our own oil.
When gasoline reaches $5 or $6 a gallon and our economy comes to a screeching halt, with everyone out of work, will Sen. Reid and his cohorts wake up? I doubt it.
I can hardly wait for Election Day!
Jim Horsley
HENDERSON
Drill Nevada
To the editor:
Two Wall Street Journal articles in the past couple of weeks have highlighted the locations of domestic oil reserves. Both articles noted reserves (in the billions of barrels) in the eastern part of our very own state along with some areas of western Utah.
The problem? Much of the oil is on government land and either completely off limits or restricted.
We are wringing our hands over education funding and government budget shortfalls while discussing new taxes on the very tourists who are our economic lifeblood. One can only imagine that opening up Nevada lands to oil extraction could provide a tremendous tax gain for the state government over the next few years (not including the benefits of putting more oil on the market, as every little bit helps).
In the interest of helping Nevada take financial advantage of natural resources (and the development of oil resources necessary to fuel our tourism-based economy), I strongly call on Sen. Harry Reid, in his powerful position of Senate majority leader, to introduce legislation that will make these lands available for oil exploration.
Sen. Reid needs to decide if he's working for nationwide environmental extremist groups or if he's truly working for Nevada's needs amid these fiscal and energy crises.
Ted Newkirk
LAS VEGAS
More gun laws
To the editor:
In a column published in Tuesday's Review-Journal, Stanley Crouch urged the National Rifle Association to propose or back more legislation to crack down on illegal firearms dealers.
I'm curious -- how much more illegal we can make something? It's been illegal to deal in firearms without a federal firearms license since 1968 -- 40 years. Do we need another law because, dangit, this time we really mean it?
The NRA is now and always has stood shoulder-to-shoulder with rank-and-file cops, and has and will support laws that target criminality with firearms. What the NRA opposes are laws that actually have little to no impact on criminals while placing ridiculous restrictions on people who do obey the law.
Case in point: Mr. Crouch states that 4,043 illegal firearms were confiscated by police in the city of New York last year. The city of New York, in its infinite wisdom, has administratively run all but a handful of legal gun dealers out of business. It takes an honest citizen who lives in the city of New York close to a year to get the paperwork processed to buy a hunting rifle or shotgun. Does no one else see the lunacy here?
It seems tough for a lot of people to understand that criminals don't obey laws -- that's why they are criminals. And just as there is a black market for narcotics, there is a black market for guns.
James T. Davenport
LAS VEGAS
Immigration law
To the editor:
In his Sunday column about immigration, the Review-Journal's Vin Suprynowicz wrote, "under current federal law if these [undocumented] kids are granted legal resident status, the parents can then apply for legal resident status, which is likely to be granted to prevent the kids being 'orphaned.' "
If a child is granted lawful permanent resident status, the child's parent does not automatically have the right under current federal law to apply for legal status. In fact, only after the child turns 21; applies for and becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen after at least five years of legal status; and if the parent originally entered the United States legally, not illegally, can the parent seek legal status through the child. Otherwise, the parent simply is not eligible.
There is no current federal law which is "likely to grant" legal status to the parent of a lawful permanent resident child in order to prevent the child from being "orphaned."
Mr. Suprynowicz, you certainly have the right to your opinion about immigration, but as a journalist wielding the power of the pen, you also have a responsibility not to mislead readers with grossly inaccurate statements about the law.
Adam Chester
LAS VEGAS
