I would like to comment on the newest law enforcement policy on the seat belt law, the "Click It or Ticket" policy. While I think no rational adult can deny that seat belts save lives, this policy is a revenue builder, plain and simple.
If the lawmakers were truly interested in "safety," then motorcycle riders would have to wear helmets. The argument for the motorcycle riders is that they are fully insured and take that risk themselves. Hello - if auto drivers don't have insurance, their licenses and tags are suspended. Would you not agree that one would fare better in a car without a seat belt on than one would do on a motorcycle?
In a day and age where we can choose to use tobacco as a "personal choice," all the while knowing the risks, and a woman can abort a human being in the name of convenience because it is "her body," why in the world cannot grown adults decide if they want to use a seat belt? (I agree that if children or infants are in the vehicle, they should not be subject to adult ideals and should be restrained without question.) As a grown adult, I should have the same "choice" about whether or not to wear my seat belt.
I ask again: Is this truly a safety concern or more likely a revenue builder? I think the latter!
-- John C. Luttrell, Largo
Embrace a fireworks ban
Re: Fireworks sales face fight, May 24.
The spirit of Thanksgiving isn't really about turkeys, and the spirit of Independence Day isn't about fireworks. And our troops didn't sacrifice in Afghanistan and Iraq for the right to shoot off bottle rockets, as one dealer told the Pinellas County Commission. There are good and valid reasons for a ban on the increasing use of such explosives in the county. There are no valid arguments against the proposed ban.
Yes, some purchasers may pick up fireworks in neighboring counties until they, too, join Pasco and Pinellas with their own legislation. But those who will fight their way across the bridges to Hillsborough will undoubtedly be fewer than those who can now simply pull over to the side of the road.
And, yes, there will always be those who will violate the law, just as there are those who currently ignore other legislation. Here in Pinellas County we have numerous traffic officers, all kinds of traffic laws and courts to enforce the laws as well as jails for the violators. The result? Tampa Bay has some of the worst traffic conditions in America - more accidents, more bicycle accidents, more pedestrians hit and more careless driving generally. So do we fire the cops, tear up the laws and close down the courts? Obviously not. We just have to do a better job of enforcement. Similarly, we can expect a ban of fireworks sales to be violated. But certainly sales will not be the same as they are now, and we can expect that injuries, property damage and general hell-raising to decrease significantly.
-- John Royse, St. Petersburg
Political system hits new lows
Re: Go ahead, break a leg; even better, break two, May 23.
Howard Troxler's column regarding the ridiculous action by the Florida Legislature in cracking down on the "catastrophic" injuries in workers' compensation cases is an incredible account illustrating the depths to which the political system has sunk.
Everything is for sale. Government today is in no way democratic in the sense that it represents a "government of the people, by the people and for the people." In reality, politicians are for sale to the highest bidder. The highest bidders, unfortunately, are the corporations and the labor unions, who literally spend billions in pursuit of their selfish interests. The examples are endless: Telephone companies, insurance companies, sugar companies, supermarket chains, ad infinitum.
I am equally disgusted with each major party and no longer contribute to either one. I am now a registered Independent and seriously wrestle with the idea of not voting for either presidential candidate in the national elections. Voting under these circumstances seems almost hypocritical.
What is so ironic is that the average voter doesn't seem to care enough to review the record of his/her representatives. As Mr. Troxler says, "What kills me is that your member of the House or Senate is probably going to win re-election anyway." The prevailing sentiment seems to be "the system is rotten but our rep takes care of us and that's what counts."
Having become somewhat cynical in my old age, I'm not sure we'll ever change the system.
-- DeWitt H. Joralemon, New Port Richey
Sweet privacy
Gov. Jeb Bush chose to sign the Everglades bill in private. Supposedly it will then be fixed by yet another bill. Perhaps I am too cynical, but the only reasons I can think for this behind-closed-doors signing are:
1. He is a little ashamed of himself. (But he is a politician, and perhaps his conscience doesn't bother him.)
2. He thinks the Florida voters have very short attention spans, and if there is no photograph to remind them, they will soon forget he just sold out to Big Sugar.
-- Madelyn Lawson, Clearwater
The entrepreneurial spirit
Re: Republicans redefine American dream, by Michael Kinsley, May 20.
In his column Michael Kinsley makes this incredible statement: "The myth of small business is one of the more ridiculous bipartisan superstitions that influence government policy." For years I have watched Mr. Kinsley give his "opinion" on various television shows. I have also read his "opinions" in your newspaper on several occasions. Has Michael Kinsley ever had a real job? Not that I know of. He just makes (not earns) megabucks with his leftist "opinions."
In point of fact, what has allowed the United States to become the greatest economic success in the world with the highest standard of living for all citizens is the opportunity to reap the rewards of the fruits of our labor and investment. This opportunity is manifested in the unleashing of the entrepreneurial spirit that has been instilled into all persons by our creator.
The real "myth" is that there is any positive societal impact resulting from the socialistic agenda espoused by Michael Kinsley.
-- Dick Ruzicka, St. Petersburg
The problem is too many people
Re: Only education will eradicate famine.
In his May 21 column, Nicholas D. Kristof states that tomorrow's famine can be prevented with irrigation ditches, schools and, oddly, AIDS education. The article left me with a sense that the writer cannot see the forest for the trees.
The obvious solution was not even touched upon and yet can be proven by simple economic principle and mathematics. The principle I refer to is "supply and demand." Too little food (supply) and too many people (demand). When food supplies increase linearly while the human population increases exponentially, the result will always be famine.
Surely, the problem of famine in Africa is exacerbated by local ethos and custom. However, I find it inexplicable that Kristof fails to cite the promotion of birth-control as a basic response to a problem generated primarily by overpopulation.
-- Andrew J. Stier, Palm Harbor
Liars or pawns?
A cold chill ran through me when I read The Gore-ing of John Kerry: Media find their next target by Ben Fritz. How are these so-called reporters and writers any different from Stephen Glass or Jayson Blair, distorting the truth for their own purposes - or are they all pawns of the Republican Party? I applaud the St. Petersburg Times and Ben Fritz for this enlightening story. Let's have more so we can know the real truth.
-- Ruth Kline, Tampa
The perils of media deregulation
"Deregulation" has been sold, since the Reagan administration, as the best means to improve market competition. So the FCC, chaired by Michael Powell (Secretary of State Colin Powell's son), is ramming through further and even more radical deregulation of the public's airwaves. If it weren't for the efforts of the minority Democratic commission appointees, there would have been no public comment at all.
According to Robert McChesney, media scholar and professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, as interviewed May 19 on Amy Goodman's radio program Democracy Now, the public comment that has been allowed on the proposed rule has been overwhelmingly against the new rule. His figures are that, of 5,000 people who attended the few public hearings that have taken place, only one person, an employee of broadcast giant Clear Channel, spoke in favor of the new rule. In written comments, of 12,000 submitted, only 11 were in favor of the new rule.
Since the last round of media deregulation, also according to McChesney, vast concentration has grown up in media markets. Quite predictably, removal of restrictions on the number of radio and TV stations and newspapers in any given market that can be owned by a single owner has resulted in the giants - such as Liberty Media, Clear Channel and News Corp. - absorbing the small fry and there actually being less competition and variety of views. The result of this is media outlets that are homogenous in news, editorial viewpoint and music. According to McChesney, news gathering has been reduced to a sharing of "content" among wholly owned media outlets. The result of that, according to McChesney, is that substantially the same editorial viewpoint tends to appear in all the outlets owned by a given owner of local outlets. As he finds, this ownership is being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands and competition of any kind is squeezed out of the equation.
So, in true 1984 style, not only is war peace and hate love, but Big Brother now also tells us that media oligarchy is competition and freedom of thought.
-- Carl A. Schuh, St. Petersburg
A citizen pushed aside
Thank you for the May 23 column by William Safire, Much rides on media monopoly vote. Our conservative government has reduced my value because of my age, 71, and appropriates funds accordingly. In addition since the equal-time ruling was rescinded in the 1980s, I can't find a radio station that has a different point of view other than the White House's. I have been pushed aside and reduced to being an American citizen of no importance. No one wants to speak for me. This column is a beginning, and it gives me hope that others will join your ranks.
-- Anthony Alatis, Clearwater
An unseemly focus on a child's anguish
Re: A cry as plane plummeted: "Daddy," May 21.
I am writing to express my displeasure regarding this article. I struggle to see the news relevance of relating the traumatic fear of a 12-year-old due to the separation from her father at the moment of her death. This particular focus of the article, which should have solely detailed the mechanical and human errors behind the accident, was extremely gratuitous and served no purpose to the community.
This child's anguish should have been kept private out of respect to her surviving family. Furthermore, placing it on the front page makes me believe that its sole purpose was to sell your newspaper. Please use better judgment in the future.
-- Maria T. Aranda, Tampa
Share your opinions
Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to 893-8675.
They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number.
Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.
