Letters for February 26, 2015

Guns are evil

I am a student at UNR who is against campus carry. I walk all the way across campus in the dark to my car three times a week. Right now I feel safe, but if all students and faculty were allowed to carry guns on my campus, I would not. Furthermore, a police officer only has an 18 percent chance of hitting his or her target! Imagine what the odds are for a non-cop! Campus carry is supposed to be about protection, but if there was a shooting, how would the police tell who are the perpetrators and who were the protectors? More guns means more shootings, and I want my campus to remain safe! So I urge readers to contact their legislators and tell them to oppose this dangerous bill!

Adelle Fuller

Reno

High noon

I’m a concerned citizen who is frequently on campuses for library use, events and committee work, and I have serious concerns about the move to allow guns to be carried onto college campuses. When campus presidents overwhelmingly reject campus requests, and when staff can’t imagine lecturing to a room full of possibly armed students, why would legislators even consider such a dangerous action? We send our children to college to be educated, become socially responsible adults and to find their place in the world. We don’t usually envision that world to be something approximating the O.K. Corral. I urge our legislators to truly protect our students by rejecting Assembly Bill 2.

Karren Smith

Reno

146,000 deaths a year worldwide

Re “When Ignorance Reigns” (Editoral, Feb. 12):

There are no black-and-white answers to the vaccine issue. Consider this: “In the last 10 years there have been 1,564 cases of measles in the U.S. and zero deaths. There have been 83 deaths reported from measles vaccine,” according to HealthChoice.org, using numbers from the Centers for Disease Control. The Vaccine Injury Program that provides life-long and death benefits to children injured by vaccines exists for a reason. The risk of severe injury is known. I am a longtime civil rights advocate in the disability community. I know folks who receive these benefits. Welcome to our world. Nothing wrong with that. It just is. And so is sickness and so is death. But dreams of utopian empires where everyone behaves as you think best are really dangerous, and should be avoided at all costs.

Deidre Hammon

Reno

Actually … no

Re “When Ignorance Reigns” (Editoral, Feb. 12):

I’m not firmly on either side of this debate, but I would love to see less polarizing language used toward the anti-vaccine group, since for many parents trying to be informed and do their best for their children, the vaccination decision can be an agonizing one. How can it be said that there is no scientific basis for vaccination concern? The many documented negative side effects of vaccinations are not folklore, and are a legitimate concern for parents, none of whom want a return to the leg brace, iron lung days, I’m sure. I can’t agree with painting these parents as some kind of flat-earth Luddites hanging out in some self-reinforcing cul de sac. But many do have a healthy distrust in our medical establishment and government, both of which sadly have a history of questionable motives in their communication with the public, as Dennis Myers correctly pointed out. I sincerely hope that both sides, and especially our journalists and editors, can keep an open mind and impartial tone as we as a society try to navigate this important topic, which I know many agree is not a closed case and is still an issue very worthy of impartial, intelligent, thoughtful, scientific and reasonable debate.

T. Alan Moore

Reno

Editor’s note: We don’t subscribe to the theory that we’re supposed to pretend not to have an informed opinion just because we’re printed on newsprint, but we welcome you expressing your opinion about it on these pages. Here’s some unbiased information about measles: www.cdc.gov/measles/about/faqs.html

Don’t read me, bro

Re “Don’t poke me, bro” (Let Freedom Ring, Feb. 12):

I find it amazing that Brendan Trainor believes tobacco smoking to be a “purely private health decision.” When someone else’s tobacco smoke is carried by air currents into my lungs, it’s no longer a private health decision. My grandpa smoked in the house through the 1950s and ’60s, and my mom’s lungs are destroyed as a result. She suffers daily from COPD. They even had a dog die of lung cancer. Over the past 30 years, we have made great strides in ridding this country of smokers. Anyone who thinks smoking is OK is not OK in my book.

Karen Inda

Sparks

Shot to the heart

Re “When Ignorance Reigns” (Editoral, Feb. 12):

I read The Great Influenza by John M. Barry about the deadliest plague in history. It outlined the devastation caused by the 1918-1919 worldwide influenza pandemic. To say that this writer researched the pandemic is an understatement. He talked much of the dedicated scientists who fought relentlessly to stop this deadly virus that killed millions of people. He also described the other diseases (i.e., polio, smallpox, measles, tuberculosis, typhoid, dyphtheria, pneumonia etc.) that were killing millions. These scientists worked to stabilize the populations of the world against these diseases and succeeded in many cases in nearly eradicating them. The government was a block to their progress, as it is today. It stepped in to help fight the devastation after it was too late. I don’t want government to regulate my life any more than opponents of “big government,” but since they control our health care, they need to either determine what is best for the people of this country and the world or get out of the way of the few scientists who care enough to try to save us from natural disasters. The immunizations are a product of these scientists’ determination to stop these diseases. If opponents of immunization watched one child suffer these diseases, they may see that if it can be prevented it should be prevented.

Rhonda L. Whiteside

Sun Valley

The dog ate his homework

Re “Competing budgets” (Editorial, Feb. 19):

Dear Senator Roberson,

In reading the account of your February 12 Finance Committee meeting (LVRJ, 2/12/15), I was stunned at the arrogant and abusive way you treated an elected member of this State Administration. Your personal attack on Treasurer Dan Schwartz was outrageous—exactly the sort of attack one resorts to when unable to compete intellectually.

I suggest you take three corrective actions:

First I suggest you review the results of last November’s election. You’ll find that Dan Schwartz won convincingly in a statewide election. You’ll also find that many of your own State Senate District 20 constituents cast their votes for Dan Schwartz.

Next, I suggest you review the invitation Gov. Sandoval issued to those who disagree with his proposed budget. The governor asked them to submit their own suggestions. Treasurer Dan Schwartz simply accepted the governor’s invitation.

Finally, I suggest you owe Treasurer Dan Schwartz a public apology.

There certainly was a person in your hearing whose behavior was embarrassing, as well as being a thumb in the eye of Nevada’s voters. That person was not Dan Schwartz.

Robert R. Kessler

Las Vegas