Letters for March 8, 2007

Photo finish
Re “Real anger” (News, Feb. 8):

This is just another addition to the growing Orwellian police state/surveillance society we have been subjected to since the events of 9/11. A national ID card will in no way protect us from such events as those that occurred on 9/11. The “suspected” perps of 9/11 may have used fake driver’s licenses to board those aircraft, but these new IDs will not stop future attackers from striking other targets. They already used airplanes as weapons; they’ll just move on to something else.

There is any number of potential targets where mass casualties can happen. Attacks in these places will in no way be prevented by the loss of our liberty and personal privacy for this new ID. If the freedom that we possess drives others’ hatred and motivations for our demise (which is ludicrous), then they are winning because we are losing our liberties for the illusion of security.

Nick Aguilera
Carson City

Out of site
We’d like to add a voice of dissatisfaction regarding the new RN&R Web site design. We find it to be crowded, busy, confusing and not user-friendly. Also, each page takes an inordinate amount of time to download and display.

Reno’s most accessible source of editorial pages and local events listings is gone. We’re very disappointed, and now we need to search to find an alternative, which we doubt exists.

Isa and J. Sanford
Sun Valley

Editor’s note: While we are working out the bugs on this site, we appreciate any input anyone has to offer. Please feel free to e-mail rantsnraves@newsreview.com.

A market for crank

Re “Leave my cold medicine alone” (View from the Fray, March 1):

How should Reno respond to illicit methamphetamine use? During the crack epidemic of the ‘80s, New York City chose the zero-tolerance approach, opting to arrest and prosecute as many offenders as possible. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C., Mayor Marion Barry was smoking crack, and America’s capital had the highest per capita murder rate in the country. Yet crack use declined in both cities simultaneously.

Simply put, the younger generation saw firsthand what crack was doing to their older brothers and sisters and decided for themselves that crack was bad news. This is not to say nothing can be done about meth. Access to drug treatment is critical for the current generation of users. Diverting resources away from prisons and into cost-effective treatment would save both tax dollars and lives.

Robert Sharpe, MPA
Common Sense for Drug Policy
Washington, D.C.

Corporations should contribute
Re “What gives you the right?” (Right Hook, March 1):

In today’s world it may be more fitting to “Ask not what civilization can do for you. Ask what you can do for civilization.” Because, let’s face it, we are all dependent on one another more than ever before.

Doesn’t freedom include freedom of choice? I can choose whether or not to watch a movie, read the paper, eat meat or go vegetarian, smoke, drink or skydive. And yet I find that I don’t have a viable choice when it comes to who I pay for energy. I’m an average citizen born into a box that we call a home, where energy comes from holes in the walls, run off fossil fuels. My home is in a town where, to be a productive member of society, I may need a job. That place of business more than likely runs off fossil fuels. To get to that job, I may need something other than my own two feet, requiring a vehicle that runs off fossil fuels. (Yes, even those hydrogen plants run off the stuff.)

Somewhere along the line, the Earth-damaging mining and burning of fossil fuels for energy became just cheap enough to render any other means of energy production non-profitable or non-attainable. So, I reluctantly feed the Giant and line its ever-growing pockets. That leads me to a question of my own:

Shouldn’t we ask not what civilization can do for Big Oil, but what Big Oil can do for civilization?

Kristin Ashton

It’s money that matters
I have lived in several other states, and I have learned that greed is the motive that propels environmental degradation. Here in Nevada, it is the casino owners, land speculators and ski resort owners who own the legislators and decision makers. These paid lobbyists then cause legislation to be enacted that promotes environmental damage.

As I read about the foolhardy flood-control plan in Reno and the removal of old-growth trees in South Lake Tahoe, the only value powerful Nevadans seem to hold dear is that of the bottom line. So much of the Eastern United States has been ruined by tacky development and the concrete channelization of rivers that it is surprising that the same mistakes are planned for Nevada.

No one needs to fear that terrorists will destroy Nevada: The money men who chase the slot machine jockeys, land speculators and impatient skiers will do that. The ringing of those slot machine bells, the development of flood plains, and the overcrowded ski hills are a warning to see Nevada now before the natural beauty is gone forever.

Then, when no more profit can be wrung out of Lake Tahoe and the Truckee Meadows, the money men will move on in search of other areas to rape. And, as usual, the taxpayer will be left holding the bag.

Judith M. Hansel