Thursday, November 29, 2007
Does writer really think homeless prefer to eat out of trash cans?
Letters to the Editor
Recent letters to the editor
- Letters: A home-school mom pays taxes, too
- Pick of the day: Home-schoolers reject public schools
- Pick of the day: Passing the buck won't stop abuse
- Letters archive
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Does writer really think homeless prefer to eat out of trash cans?
Re: David Hawkins' letter "Compassion doesn't extend to panhandlers" (Nov. 26), wherein he bemoans that "able-bodied men and women" would "rather ... eat out of trash cans than seek self-help":
According to the Department of Health and Human Services, at least 25 percent of homeless adults live with mental illness, which commonly goes untreated. Studies indicate that the highest percentage of homeless adults who use refuse bins as a source of food are those with mental illnesses. Focusing on who seems to be "able-bodied" is not only wildly subjective, it misses the point.
Disparaging people whose lives we know nothing about and obliquely dividing the world into "us" and "them" will not address the core problems of homelessness. Accessible, timely, sustainable mental health care might.
I'd encourage Hawkins to explore what it might mean to "seek self-help" as a person with compromised resources before he blithely suggests that Roanoke's homeless citizens "hop back on that bus" so he can have them out of sight and mind.
Assuming one has the right to turn a blind eye to those in need depends on a sense of entitlement arguably worse than supposing the world owes one a trash can lunch.
A harsher punishment needed in child's death
Re: the article "Study links child abuse, cohabitation," (Nov. 18):
The article states that Phillip Guymon "hurled" his girlfriend's 2-year-old son across a room "because he balked at going to bed." This resulted in the boy's death. This vermin is serving five years in prison for felony child abuse homicide.
When a person gets more prison time for nonviolent crimes such as burglary, selling drugs, etc., this says something about our judicial system. While not being one to stand outside a prison screaming, "Fry him," I would make an exception in this case.
There is something definitely wrong with this picture.
Too many deer, too many regulations
Deer are all over the place in the Roanoke region. It has been like this for a number of years and nothing has effectively been done to control them. I believe that there are many other areas in Virginia that are overpopulated with deer.
Deer need to be listed as a nuisance species for at least one year, and then, if their population is effectively reduced, the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries can put limits on how many deer a hunter can harvest.
Also, this system they have to allow you to hunt is ridiculous. You need one license for hunting with a bow or crossbow, another for a black powder gun and another to use a firearm. This doesn't include the one you have to have for the act of hunting.
I feel like this is more of a type of racket for easy state money. Just what does the department do to make it so good for hunters and fishermen in Virginia?
Protecting Virginia's wilderness areas
I second the opinions in the commentary "Congress moves forward on wilderness protection" (Nov. 8).
It's easy these days to become jaded and feel Congress is mired in politics and stalemate; it's refreshing to see Democrats and Republicans putting aside partisanship in the interest of doing what's best for our state.
We are fortunate to live where industry and development can co-exist with untamed wilderness. As someone who enjoys both the great outdoors and the plentiful job opportunities our state has to offer, I think it is crucial that we act now to protect Virginia's wildlands to maintain this unique balance.
The House passage of the Virginia Ridge and Valley Act is a step in the right direction. Without both parties uniting, we risk someday having to tell our children how beautiful the Virginia wilderness was.
I appreciate the protection of our water sources. Had Georgia's legislators managed Atlanta's watershed to protect water resources, I doubt they would be in the dire position that they find themselves in today.
May the bill receive the same support and attention in the Senate. This holiday season, that would truly be something to be thankful for.
Newspaper priorities don't make sense
Re: The Roanoke Times on Nov. 22:
You buried a world news item ("3 suspects in teen's disappearance rearrested") on page 8 of section A.
Another item of national interest ("Chesapeake rejects ethanol plant idea") was placed on the back page of the Virginia section.
On page 2 of section A you placed all the Hollywood garbage. Way to go, Roanoke Times.
Media jobs depend on big government
Though shamed by evidence that the media tend to ignore presidential candidates' positions on issues, Dan Radmacher is still in denial about partisan bias ("Harvard study is an indictment of the media," Nov. 11 column). He should consider how the two are connected.
Media bias is not so much pro-Democrat as pro-democratic. The media are a vital link between citizens and government. When journalists and commentators stir up public outrage, it's in the fervent belief that government will respond and improve things.
In a semblance of neutrality, the media favor what they call "moderate" or "centrist" candidates. By this, they mean adherents of their "we can make government work" philosophy. The labels aren't applied to Libertarian candidates and other adherents of the "government seldom does anything well" philosophy. Those crossovers get relegated to the political fringe.
For individuals earning a living from the democratic process (in news and politics), a big, bumbling government translates into job security.
Consequently, most in the media are simply too content with government's broader direction to care much about candidates' specific proposals.
The general public, by contrast, is very much concerned about where government is headed, and not so much about who gets to drive.
A woman's vibrant vision for Clifton Forge
I have never met Louise Belmont nor would I expect our paths to ever cross. I read with great interest the article "Transforming a town" (Nov. 23) about her and the vision she has for the town of Clifton Forge.
Belmont is clearly a person who knows the value of money and has chosen to use her assets to benefit, not only herself, but also the citizens of Clifton Forge and the surrounding area.
To quote Dolly Levi, "Money is like, excuse the expression, manure. It's not worth a thing unless it is spread about, encouraging young things to grow."
Belmont has gone Dolly Levi, and others, a step further. She is spreading her money to encourage young things to grow and also to give vibrant new life to old things.
Thank you, Belmont. Your contributions are a lantern that will, hopefully, light the way for others.
Want poll workers? Treat them better
It seems that there is a problem recruiting workers to work at the polls on Election Day.
My feeling is they might attract more workers if the hours of 5 a.m. to 9 p.m. were split into two shifts and if the Republican and Democratic parties got together and used a little of their expense money to supply some food for the workers.
I'm hoping to see a change in procedure.
