Editor: The dog walkers of West Pasco are the most inconsiderate people I've ever encountered. They prance over their neighbors' lawns with reckless abandon, making sure little Fido urinates on only the finest landscapes available. When they are caught red-handed, they come out with lame excuses such as, "She just won't go on my lawn, wink-wink." Or, "Urine is harmless." But it's a different story when they get back home and violently yank the leash to prevent their dogs from damaging their own turf.
When I moved to Florida, I was told by the natives that it was cruel to subject a dog to the horrendous heat. Now, dogs are a staple of almost every home. I love all animals with the exception of the two-legged ones. Where did these people come from? I'm sure it wasn't from New York. People there actually walk their dogs in an empty lot or wooded areas and the like.
I would also like to educate all the morons who say dog urine is harmless. Dog urine contains high levels of nitrogen, which will kill your lawn overnight. It is equivalent to overfertilizing your lawn. But the thing that gets me is the attitude of these morons - that nothing is too good for their royal pooch. They look at you as if you're the crazy one. There are more important things in life to waste time worrying about, but their arrogance is amazing.
-- Robert Schechter, Port Richey
Don't like traffic, noise? Don't build near airport
Editor: I have never been in or around the planes that use the airport where the crash occurred Thursday, but I have lived in Pasco for more than 15 years, with ties much longer, and have an extremely hard time understanding people who build next to an airport and then complain and worry about the traffic, noise and possible danger. That particular airport has been there a long time.
-- Woody Church, Dade City
Story was missing facts and fairness
Editor: This letter is in response to a recent article written by Molly Moorhead with Chase Squires contributing. I was not going to respond to this travesty, but it would have been against all of the principles I strive for and all that I live and breathe.
This story was biased and opinionated and did not tell the facts as they were given.
First and foremost, I fail to find a correlation between an old medical diagnosis and a wrongful conviction to that of a "hate crime." If the city manager and others who are able to ascertain the truth see this deplorable and despicable act as a hate crime, I certainly know the true message this bold and brazen individual tunneling through my yard in the darkness in the wee hours of the morning was trying to send.
Your reporter should be held to a higher standard and should always seek the truth in the controversy rather than trying to sell newspapers. When people invite Satan into their home, they get what they deserve. Satan is a liar and a cheat who only seeks to destroy the foundation that is godly and upright.
You failed to mention that I have been fighting this wrongful conviction since its inception. I see that they conveniently forgot to mention that I filed my own appeal on the wrongful conviction, ineffective assistance of counsel.
What were you insinuating with your article? Exactly what was your point? I am still trying to determine your role as "devil's advocate." What purpose was served when someone's life and liberty are threatened? The St. Pete Times should be boycotted for allowing Molly Moorhead to try to downplay such an egregious violation of human rights on the premise that one's disability caused her to be intimidated, threatened and harassed.
Perhaps the Justice Department, with its Americans with Disabilities Act, should get involved, along with the other organizations that have stepped up to the forefront, and see what is happening to my family for exactly what it is and not what is alleged!
-- Lynda Perry Johnson, Zephyrhills
Root of ex-cheerleader's problems lies in mother
Editor: I read and reread the article about the former Pasco High cheerleader, and I see in it an egotistical mother who has ruined her son's life by not letting him be a boy. Wouldn't let him play football because he might get hurt but directed him to an activity that is usually mostly female.
Sure, he may have been set up by his fellow cheerleaders, but he should have gone with the school's decision and went on from there.
If he knew he didn't do what he was accused of, then he should feel no guilt and could get on with his life. After all, life is not a bowl of cherries, and the sooner you learn it, the better off you are.
Now it looks like he will be a problem to himself for the rest of his life. Too bad he has a mother who was so overprotective that she ruined her child's life.
-- Jo Ann Merritt, Seminole
[Last modified June 5, 2004, 23:52:18]
