Letters for May 24, 2007

Love the Mexican
Re “Ask, don’t rant” (Ask a Mexican, May 17):

I wish that Ask a Mexican was a weekly event! I like Gustavo Arellano’s writing, and the “logical smackdowns” make me laugh out loud. Please, editors, lose Lafferty and print Ask a Mexican in its place.

Ms. Sparky Allen


Editor’s note: We do run Gustavo Arellano’s column every week online: www.newsreview.com/reno/Archive?author=312407

Force disclosure
It is absolutely ridiculous to say pregnant women are provided full disclosure about abortion by Planned Parenthood or other social service agencies. If that was the case, then every Planned Parenthood counseling facility and all abortion clinics in Nevada would have an ultrasound medical device available. Utilizing ultrasound would allow pregnant women to view the fetus and embryo. Then (upon request for a nominal fee) be provided a video copy or series of photos of the ultrasound. This important information would help women make an objective decision on the future of their unborn child. The choice to abort is solely that of the pregnant woman, and not that of parents, family, counselors or well-intended friends. It is documented that approximately 80 percent of pregnant women who view ultrasound images of their fetus decide not to have the abortion. Nevadans need to push for these agencies to install ultrasound devices and make it policy for all pregnant women to be provided this vital disclosure. Contact your legislators about this. Don’t expect the ACLU or the stem-cell industry to make this happen!

Tom McCormack

No amnesty
We are in the process of rewarding approximately 12 million folks for their ability to break the law of the land. Why stop there? We have tens of thousands of folks incarcerated for various crimes, and it appears they as well are victims of discrimination. Why should our homegrown lawbreakers be held accountable for their actions when our beloved brothers and sisters from the south are not? Let’s fire those discriminatory cops, open the jails, close the courts and live in the society we are striving for and so justly deserve.

Michael Jack

Death by gun laws
Cho Seung-Hui, a very disturbed South Korean who had been living in this country since 1992, killed his two victims in a Virginia Tech dormitory after 7 a.m. and then, two hours later, he committed suicide after killing 31 others in a classroom building across the campus. An e-mail was sent to students at 9:26 a.m. informing them of the first incident, but this was right as the killer was at the classroom building killing more innocent victims, giving students no chance to take evasive action.

Virginia Tech is a “gun free” campus. Thus, the students had no real opportunity to protect themselves against an armed mad man.

Universities also need to examine their procedures on how to treat troubled students. Seung-Hui was the poster child for anger, depression, even rage. According to his roommates, he rarely spoke, was rude and even hostile and on multiple occasions stalked female students. The campus police interrogated Seung-Hui after at least one of these episodes but did nothing else. He took inappropriate cell phone pictures of other students during class, and again, nothing was done. Police believe that he probably was the one responsible for multiple bomb threats in recent weeks.

There is a state law in Virginia that requires that someone represent an “imminent danger to himself or others” before he can be compelled to seek treatment. In 2005, a Virginia judge ruled that Cho met this standard, but nothing was done. In fact, the organization that was responsible for compelling Cho to seek treatment claimed to know nothing about the law requiring Cho to seek treatment.

When Cho’s “poetry” was read aloud in an English class, it was so terrifying that at the next meeting of the class, only seven of 70 students showed up. Cho was removed from that class, and another professor began to tutor him one-on-one, but only after establishing a secret code word with her assistant to signal when she should call security. Another alarmed professor went to her dean with worries about Cho. She was told that nothing could be done, so Cho was simply placed off to the side of the seminar, and his writing was not read aloud.


People who are forced to remain unarmed are at the mercy of an armed mad man.

Any number of people in Virginia knew that Cho Seung-Hui was dangerous; however, no real steps were taken to protect those whom Cho came into contact with during a normal week.

Was the incident Cho’s fault? No, Cho was insane and not responsible for his actions. Was the administration of Virginia Tech at fault? The answer has to be yes, and questions need to be asked and answered publicly as to why nothing realistic was done. If the answers are “Mistakes were made,” then those who made the mistakes need to be fired, to establish a pattern of responsibility and punishment for stupidity. Was the administration of the State of Virginia at fault? The answer has to be yes, and questions need to be asked and answered publicly as to why nothing realistic was done. As of this point in time, the actions taken seem to follow what must be the State of Virginia motto: CYA!

A.J. Bima