Opinion: Seniors shouldn't expect handouts from government

In the news, we hear how there are so many greedy seniors who want every thing provided to them by our government. Everyone knows, including these greedy individuals, that others will have to pay for these programs -- in other words, their children and their grandchildren. But they don't care! They can afford nice homes, nice new cars, eating out at restaurants three or four times a week, but they can't afford their prescription drugs. How sad.

But they are not the only ones with their grubby hands out. That is what politics has boiled down to: who gives away the most "goodies."

It was refreshing to hear in this column from seniors (like myself) who feel that we should not be grubbing as much from our government as possible and passing the bill on to future generations (in other words, our children). I applaud their thinking.

If there are seniors who truly cannot afford prescription drugs, etc., then there should be help for them, and there is, if they need it! As for the others who have a comfortable retirement but follow the Al Gore liberal mind set that the government owes me: Shame on you! How about thinking of someone else for a change! Individuals are already paying more than one-third of their income in taxes. Do you want your children and grandchildren to be paying 50 percent or more in the not too distant future? I don't!

And a note to the younger generation: You had better start paying attention, following the news, getting involved and voting, because if you don't, the hogs at the government trough aren't going to leave anything for you except the bills!
-- Robert E. Guthrie, Seminole

A burden on future generations

Re: Prescription drug plan .

The legacy of this program will be an enormous tax burden placed on future generations to cover today's bill.

Sorry folks there is no free lunch (or prescription drugs), and government surpluses don't last forever. Instead of looking for long-term solutions, once again all we are offered is a quick fix for a problem that someone else will have to deal with at a later date.
-- R.T. Harrod, St. Petersburg

It's time for new ideas

Socialized medicine -- what a controversial term! Nobody wants it, but look what is happening to us. We're at the mercy of the managed health care providers who can cancel us at will and/or increase our deductibles until we wonder what "insurance" means.

Do they use certain counties as "test cases" for their terror when political and economic clout may not be as great as in, say, Miami?

Things are not getting better -- they are getting worse. Whatever the solution, it is time for new ideas in the health care system.
-- Reese Hodges, Weeki Wachee

Money to gamble

Re: prescription drug benefits.

If senior citizens are having such a hard time paying for their health care, why is it when I visit the casinos in this country, 80 percent of the gamblers are seniors?
-- J.J. Garden, Indian Shores

Make sure justice is done

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once dreamed that one day in America a man would be judged by the content of his character, not the color of his skin. I wonder if Randolph Puryear and Sherri Toney know the significance of these words. Words do make a difference. Jemale Wells made a difference. The incident resulting in Wells' death made a difference, but the outcome of that incident is yet unfinished.

"You can't legislate away racism!" Perhaps not. But our judicial system should have the courage and the wherewithal to judiciously discern between right and wrong and to perform its lawful duties in an unbiased, non-prejudiced manner in matters involving race. We the people ought to demand no less. Moreover, it is mandatory that our system of justice be fair in its handling of crime. Let not race cloud our judgment and hamper our forthright execution of justice.

So I ask: How can the incident wherein a white man shouts racial epithets then shoots an unarmed black man in Tampa result in a charge of manslaughter? How can the spokeswoman for the Hillsborough Sheriff's Office go on record as stating that this is not a hate crime because the incident started as a fight between kids and "wasn't motivated by race"? How can a sheriff's spokesman at another time conclusively state, "(Puryear) didn't go there with a gun intending to kill somebody"?

How can the Hillsborough State Attorney's Office stand idly by (with a charge of manslaughter) as this egregious incident comes closer and closer to being politely swept under the rug? Is it possible that public opinion may be swayed in favor of the defense by what authorities state in the newspaper?

Given what we know of this incident to date, it seems reasonable to sense that something is not right with this picture. I think all can agree that it is shameful that this incident transpired. However, this shame should not give reason to deny and minimize the truth of the matter by making a loose interpretation of the facts to rationalize a charge of less than murder and to claim it was not a hate crime.

If you want to reduce the damage this type of negative publicity brings to Tampa, start by doing the right thing and ensuring that justice is served. Send a message, Tampa Bay, that intolerance and racism will not be allowed in this community! Speak out! This case should not be tainted by improper statements of conclusion voiced inappropriately by authorities in the newspaper.

Many are outraged by what seems to be a posture to soften and de-emphasize the significance of this hate crime. We are hopeful that justice will be served and that there is a wake-up call in Tampa Bay. Revenge is not sought, but certainly there is work to be done internally. No, you can't legislate away racism. It's an inside job. Please make a commitment. We all deserve better.

Peace unto you, Jemale Wells. Thanks for the content of your character.
-- Rodney S. Carroll, brother-in-law of Jemale Wells, Columbia, Md.

There was only one victim

Re: Third victim in police chase dies, Sept. 30.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, the definition of "victim" is:

1. Someone who is put to death or subjected to torture or suffering by another.

2. One who is harmed or made to suffer from an act, circumstance or condition.

3. A person who suffers injury, loss or death as a result of a voluntary undertaking of another.

If this is true, the Metro section headline of the Sept. 30 Times must be wrong. As I understand the facts, Richard Haddad is the victim. The other two teenagers who stole the car and attempted to evade capture were not victims. They were the perpetrators of this horrible crime. The parents are all victims, and my heart goes out to all of them, as well as to the police who were only trying to do their job.

Let's put the blame where it belongs.
-- Winnie Langkop, Clearwater

Teens need a wake-up call

Re: Third victim in police chase dies, Sept. 30.

How sad. Three more young lives snuffed out because of a stolen-car pursuit. The sudden end of these high-speed pursuits, more often than not, is death and/or crippling injuries that may cause lifelong suffering.

Still, it is the responsibility of law enforcement to apprehend car thieves, as the alternative is to invite an even more lawless society. The lack of strident law enforcement regarding red-light running is a perfect example. You see more and more red-light runners every day you drive. People willfully run red lights at high speed because the chances of being arrested are nil, but the consequences can be just as deadly as a car chase.

Since most of the stolen car tragedies involve juveniles, why not show the most grisly crash scene with video and photos of the mangled autos and bodies to every single child in the eighth grade? Have them see young, torn-up bodies with toe tags in a morgue. Have them see crippled teenagers in a bed they can never get out of without help.

If such a program were added to the curriculum, I believe that in due course there would be far fewer juveniles running from the police in stolen cars. They have been programed to think they can get away from the police, just like in the movies and on TV. These kids need a wake-up call to reality, and this is the way to do it.
-- Edward M. Blau, St. Petersburg

Give drivers a warning

Instead of putting signs at the strip clubs in Tampa warning adults that they may be prosecuted for being too close to the dancers, Tampa Mayor Dick Greco should put signs at all the major intersections in Tampa warning that drivers risk being killed or injured due to high-speed police chases.
-- Michael Lang, St. Petersburg

Officer used poor judgment

Re: Owner outraged at officer's killing of dog, Oct. 2.

I was deeply disturbed that a law enforcement officer with so much experience could not handle a dog with the least amount of force needed. I believe that most law enforcement officers are trained with pepper spray. That would have been a better choice. This officer used poor judgment in a public area.

The article said the dog's owners were nearby. What if a child or another person had been close enough to be hit by a bullet if the officer had missed a moving target? This is a man who tried to become the sheriff of Pinellas County. All I can say is, thank God most of our voters had the common sense not to elect a person with such poor judgment.

I do place some blame on the owners. I am a dog owner and I believe dogs belong on leashes. It is for the animals' safety as well as humans'. I also believe that Jack Soule should be liable to the owners for the care and around-the-clock feeding that will be needed for the 3-week-old puppies Sassy left behind.

Remember, most agencies have a use-of-force policy. Deadly force is the last phase of most policies. Pepper spray could have been used.
-- S. Rose, Oldsmar

Dogs should be leashed

Re: Owner outraged at officer's killing of dog.

I understand why the owner of Sassy is upset, and I am sure it is a difficult loss for her. Perhaps the officer should not have been so quick to pull his gun and shoot. I do not dispute that. But all dogs are supposed to be on a leash, are they not? I live in a neighborhood where many people have dogs, and many of those people are very irresponsible about keeping their dogs in their own yards or on a leash. Packs of dogs run through my yard, bark at other animals and people, rifle through our garbage and cause distress. Maybe these dogs are only being playful. They might be the friendliest dog ever owned. However, in the owner's absence, it is not up to a stranger to make that assessment when a dog is running at you, barking or growling.

Sassy's owner was not in view of the officer when the dog approached him, and Sassy was not on a leash. Therefore, the owner took an unnecessary risk in letting Sassy run free and is now paying the consequences. It sounds cold, but it's the cold, hard truth. Dog owners need to take more responsibility for their pets.
-- Mich Sullivan St. Petersburg

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 (727) 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page