Text Size:
A|
A|
A
Email
PrintFeel free to pollute your lungs, but don't pollute mine
OK, I have had enough! I am responding to all those smokers out there who think it is their right to pollute nonsmokers' lungs.
In reading John Messner's Nov. 30 letter ("People Find Ways Around 'Do-Gooder' Measures"), I am struck by his attempt to compare Prohibition with anti-smoking laws. To do this is like comparing apples to oranges. The act of actually drinking alcoholic beverages does not harm the people sitting or working around you. But, having a cigarette does hurt those around you.
Secondhand smoke is generally bad news and has been linked to many health problems. Don't you smokers know that by now? Not to mention that cigarette smoke smells, and when I am eating a meal or enjoying a cocktail with some friends, I don't like to have stinky, unhealthy cigarette smoke swirling around my head.
I am finding that some smokers are selfish and a bit ignorant to boot.
Mr. Messner says he has "absolutely had it with the social do-gooders who are trying to save us from ourselves." No one is trying to save smokers from the dangers of smoking -- they've already made their choice. We are just trying to save others from this nasty habit. Let the smokers pollute their own lungs to their hearts' desire! Please just let my lungs have the choice to remain smoke-free.
JULIET OLIVER
Ben Avon
Unfounded fears
Tavern owners, restaurateurs and others who fear loss of business and other repercussions from casinos in Pennsylvania serving free drinks to patrons should know that those fears are unfounded ("Gov. OKs Free Drinks in Casinos," Nov. 30).
Anyone who has been to Las Vegas or Atlantic City knows that the only ones who receive free drinks are those who are doing the gambling, and anyone who has been to a casino also knows there are bars throughout these facilities where you have to pay for drinks. Also, there is going to be only one facility in Pittsburgh, so any effect will be minimal at best.
Finally, to reiterate what the governor and others have said, the operator isn't going to jeopardize what is a major investment by having its liquor or casino license revoked by serving already intoxicated or overly intoxicated patrons.
The only concern I have are the hours that drinks are served, 7 a.m. to 2 a.m. I know the 7 a.m. opening time was put in place years ago to accommodate mill workers. Since most of the mills are gone, I would ask the Legislature to amend the hours to have them start serving later, such as 9 or 10 a.m. and tack on the extra two hours at the end of the day to 4 a.m. (this should include bars and restaurants, too). This would be wise to ensure the safety of our children, who start school usually between 7 and 9 a.m.
Casinos are here, albeit 10 to 15 years late, so embrace them and hope that we all can reap the benefits and rewards.
DAN TROTTER
Shaler
No sympathy
Merrill Stabile, president of Alco Parking, feels he should not be pressured to reduce his parking lot prices when the city's parking tax drops from 50 percent to 45 next year ("Parking Tax Will Drop, But Not Rates: Lot Operators to Use Savings to Cover Rising Expenses," Nov. 20). Mr. Stabile reasons that he should keep the tax cut because his expenses keep going up.
As Downtown property owners, we have little sympathy for Mr. Stabile. Over the past few years we and other hard-pressed commercial property owners have been forced to reduce our rental rates because of the dismal business climate Downtown, despite being faced with the same or similar rising expenses.
In fact Mr. Stabile, who is on the board of directors of the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, is one of the reasons our expenses are going up. He recently voted for and was a fervent supporter of raising the business improvement district levy 25 percent over the next five years on all commercial Downtown properties.
Mr. Stabile should reduce his parking rates and learn to live in the world he is helping to create.
GERALD SCHILLER
Penn Hills
FRANK SCHILLER
Wilkins
About dog policy
Letter writer Barbara Dempsey ("For Kids' Sake, Frick Park Dogs Should Run Loose in Designated Areas Only," Nov. 20) wonders why people let their dogs run unleashed in Frick Park, rather than using the "nicely fenced" areas the park provides. Clearly Ms. Dempsey has never visited these muddy, dank, partially fenced enclosures.
Others may ask why this issue turns up so regularly in the Post-Gazette. For months a group of responsible dog owners (fidopgh.org) has petitioned for more and better off-leash areas, a timed use of park trails and open spaces away from the main avenues of park traffic, where dogs can run and play -- amenities that most other cities willingly provide their citizens.
In the two years since I adopted my dog, I've met dozens, probably hundreds of people from all over the city, many new here from other parts of the country. Many of them are the active young professionals whom Pittsburgh now seeks to attract, and in this instance seems intent on driving away.
Frick Park is a public treasure, one of Pittsburgh's great resources and draws, and not a nature preserve, as the nonprofit groups that now determine park policy seem set on making it. Frick is a busy urban park, and large enough so all the now-competing groups that use it -- bikers, runners, dog owners and the general public -- can enjoy it without conflict or inconveniencing others.
The present policy of prohibiting unleashed dogs everywhere in the public parks is not working because it is punitive and denies a widespread and continuing public need.
DAVID WALTON
Edgewood
Shouldering the cost
I noticed a Nov. 20 letter from Janet Markel of Oakland concerning the seats in the terminal at Pittsburgh International Airport that are in need of repair ("Fix These Seats!"). Ms. Markel is correct that the seats do need to be repaired; however, the gate agent's comments that the responsibility for the maintenance of those seats falls with the Airport Authority is wrong.
By contract, the airlines are responsible for maintaining those seats and obviously have not done so. Consequently, the Airport Authority stepped in about a month ago and began repairing the seats. This should be concluded in the next six months at a cost in excess of $300,000.
KENT G. GEORGE
Executive Director/CEO
Allegheny County Airport Authority
Findlay/Moon
Sen.-elect Webb had every right to respond as he did
Your newspaper's criticism of Sen.-elect Jim Webb, D-Va. ("Respect the Office: A New Senator's Rudeness to Bush Is Unacceptable," Dec. 4) smacks of Beltway mentality.
When President Bush approached Mr. Webb and asked him how his son was faring in Iraq, Mr. Webb should have politely responded, "He's fine, sir. And have your twin daughters recovered from their hangovers after celebrating their 25th birthdays in Argentina?"
Mr. Bush and his "good German" Republicans lied their way into this failed war of choice. Their children aren't on the front line like Jim Webb's son is. And until they are, all talk of "sacrifice" coming from any Republican who voted for the Iraq war resolution rings hollow.
Jim Webb has every right to be fed up with Mr. Bush and his family of barstool warriors.
ROBERT BARAN
Peters
Shameful conduct
I was very pleased to read the Dec. 4 editorial regarding Sen.-elect Jim Webb's recent interaction with President Bush. You hit the nail on the head by distinguishing between policy decisions, in which reasonable people can disagree, and matters of national honor, where disrespecting the office of the president is tantamount to rejecting the American system of government.
In fairness to Mr. Webb, he did not know that his comments would be made public. However, now that public attention has turned to the subject, he should apologize.
Presidents come and go, and each brings a unique policy perspective. Our current president has certainly left a mark on the world, and it is everyone's duty to evaluate how well he has discharged his office. But for a future member of the U.S. Senate, itself a venerable institution worthy of respect, to conduct himself in such a manner is a shame to our national system.
No American is obligated to respect George W. Bush. In America, everyone is entitled to his own opinion. But in his disrespectful treatment of the presidency, Mr. Webb has blasphemed the same Constitution he will soon swear a solemn oath to protect.
SAM HORNAK
Upper St. Clair
We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.
