Enough’s enough when it comes to airport security
To the editor:
I stopped flying commercially when I learned that I wasn't allowed to lock my luggage and that my bags were searched without my presence. I had the feeling that they weren't so much looking for hazardous materials as they were merely rummaging through my possessions, perhaps looking for anything of value.
Then they've come up with a machine that looks through my clothing and displays my body. If I refuse that, they now give a thorough pat down that includes touching very private areas. I consider this nothing less than groping and being felt up, and I can't allow that.
Enough's enough.
Dennis Hartman
Las Vegas
Not telling
To the editor:
The TSA assures us that only men will grope men and women will grope women.
What if the groper is a flaming homosexual? Don't ask, don't tell?
Victor Moss
Las Vegas
Trust us
To the editor:
Yes, we should accept government assertions that the airport security scanners are safe. Our government would never put our health or our lives at risk.
Remember how they warned those living in St. George and others downwind about the dangers of nuclear fallout? Oh, that's right. The government told all those now-dead people that there was no risk, and that animals losing all their fur and dying just had some infection.
But wait. Government officials are now better. Yeah. They did such a good job at 9/11's Ground Zero assuring everyone that the air was safe to breath. As late as 2007 in congressional testimony, EPA chief Christine Whitman said that the evidence linking the dust to disease was not conclusive. Not conclusive? Really? What, in Ms. Whitman's view, would be conclusive? Having anyone within 10 yards of Ground Zero go into convulsions?
So, yes, let us trust the government. Or better, we could do what Israeli airport security does. They use none of these new high-tech radiation devices, but they do use techniques that require more than a room-temperature IQ -- and, horror of horrors, are more likely to closely examine a Muslim or an Arab than they are to pat down the blond 3-year-old child of blond parents.
But copying something that works would require that the government not be what it always is -- self-serving and unbelievably stupid in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Doug Nusbaum
Henderson
Vegas pride
To the editor:
I thought your Thursday article on the Clark County Commission approving Wayne Newton's request for shuttle tours of his home was the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Mr. Newton had requested a museum, auditorium, car wash and a parking lot, along with a gift shop and a wedding chapel. None of that was particularly funny (cheap and carnival-like perhaps), but I nearly fell out of my chair when Mr. Newton spoke about the project. "I want it to be something that everyone is proud of."
Nothing screams pride, especially in Las Vegas, like a car wash, a gift shop and a wedding chapel. Why the cold-hearted members of the County Commission rejected the gift shop and wedding pavilion is beyond me.
Terry Cox
Henderson
Process works
To the editor:
The number of police shootings in Las Vegas is troubling. Due to the controversy surrounding the coroner's inquest process, its true purpose has been garbled. It is meant to be a prima facie examination of the incident. It is not a probable cause hearing. It is not a trial (Wednesday Review-Journal).
Criticism has been levied upon the police and the district attorney's office because the coroner's inquest is one-sided. The Erik Scott incident was an example of turning what was meant to be rudimentary inquest into a determination of justification in the use of deadly force. Suggestions of changing it into something it is not supposed to be will accomplish nothing.
As in the Scott matter, the civil lawsuit that has been filed will determine the culpability of the actions of the police. If criminal charges need to be filed, they could be filed after examining the totality of actions that come to light in the lawsuit. To consider allowing cross-examination in these hearings benefits only lawyers.
The real issue here is to address the culture of "shoot first, ask questions later."
If the county commissioners decide to open up the hearings to cross-examination and input from the public, it will only be an attempt to silence the outcry. In reality, the system in place is sufficient. The members of the commission should resist adding another element just to cover their own hides. It would do little more than create yet another weapon for the ambulance chasers.
William C. Dwyer
Las Vegas
Actuarial problem
To the editor:
In his Wednesday letter, John Walls fails to consider several factors when he writes that recipients of Social Security are receiving exponentially more than they paid in.
The money that was paid in over many years was invested and earned interest. Much of the investment was in U.S. Treasuries, which, at times, paid as much as 9 percent. The employer also matched the contribution to the fund. Recipients of Social Security still contribute to Medicare via deductions from their benefits.
President Bush wanted to privatize the fund, which is overt evidence of the funds being invested. The actuarial problem is that the life span of individuals has increased over the years, so the early projections of annual expenditures need adjustments.
Milton Rosen
Las Vegas
