Letters, 12/17: No, the other one

 No comments  
 E-mail Story
 Print Story
  Share

 digg it!
 Facebook
 del.icio.us
Seed Newsvine
Fark It
Reddit

Text Size: 

Tools Sponsor

Tuesday morning I picked up the Journal Star and read the headline out loud:  "Peterson gets death sentence."  My 12-year-old, slightly surprised but deadly serious, looked up from his breakfast and said, "Our athletic director?!"  My 15-year-old joked, "Well, this is Nebraska."

Yes it is, but capital punishment for a losing football season really is too stiff a punishment. 

Sue M. Kirkpatrick, Lincoln

We paid for that pension

The lady who wants railroad pensions taxed (LJS, Dec. 10) must be envious of railroad pensions. If she put in the time away from home that we workers on the road did, she could have a good pension also.

I worked 43 years night and day and spent most of my time away from my wife and kids. I sat by the phone 24/7 before cell phones, because if you missed a call you would be in trouble and may get fired. I worked nights and some days all the time I worked for the railroad. I paid a lot of money into our pension plan.

Yes, we have a nice pension, but we paid for it. We also pay our fair share of taxes. So tell that lady to butt out.

Bob Schwartz, Lincoln

It's the hunt, not harvest

I would disagree wholeheartedly with Aura Lee Furgason's and Larry Claassen's sentiments in recent letters to the editor. It seems like every time a hunting season opens, we readers are treated to graphic letters of people objecting to something legal, ethical, economically and environmentally beneficial.

Nonhunters do not understand the sport of hunting. They believe it is only the taking of life and a celebration of the taking of that life. Wrong.

Hunting teaches much more than killing. Hunting teaches gun handling, appreciation and respect of the environment and ecosystems and conservation. Kids are taught that things do die and that any animal worth harvesting is worth eating. Nonlethal management tools are not cost-effective nor practical on a large-scale basis. They might work in a controlled environment such as a park, but not in the real world.

Anytime an animal is harvested by a hunter, there is remorse, not regret. Kids learn to respect the animals and spend time in nature instead of killing willy-nilly on a video game, where there are no ramifications for killing.

If you don't like to hunt, fine, but don't try to force your values on others who enjoy this way of life. Until you actually hunt or spend time with hunters, you will not know that the harvest is actually a small part of what hunters do.

John A. Johnson, Norfolk

Both sides of the ban

In a few short days the total smoking ban goes into effect.  As a nonsmoker I am all for a smoking ban.  As a member of our thriving community I am offended by our ban, and my heart goes out to those who smoke.

There are countless successful smoking bans across the country, and while they may create segregation, they provide a choice for the public to enter a public establishment if it allows smoking or is smoke-free, protecting those who do not want to be affected by someone's unhealthy habit.

Unlike smoking, most of our other unhealthy habits only directly affect us.  But you know, I could choose to enter a smoking facility.  I cannot choose to be hit by a drunken driver who just left a public drinking establishment, so I would like to see all public drinking banned.

The total smoking ban is no way to treat anyone and shows an intolerance and inability to work with each other to reach a successful compromise and still respect one another's rights.

I am saddened so many voted for it and am hopeful it will be rewritten.

Pam Hinz, Lincoln