I was appalled by Don Barden's comments in the Dec. 11 article "Casino Owner Won't Heed 'Ridiculous' Design Request." Mr. Barden has never been forthcoming with the public about plans for his casino parking garage. And now that legitimate concerns about scale and design of the casino parking garage have been raised, Mr. Barden has accused those concerned of being "obstructionists."

He's also made the preposterous suggestion that there should be a federal investigation into why he is being treated so unfairly! He comes off looking like a spoiled, petulant little child, angry that people are interfering with what he wants to do.

I would like to say this to Mr. Barden: The city of Pittsburgh is graciously allowing you to build a slots parlor within the city limits. We have a vested interest in how this building will affect our city in general and our riverfront in particular.

While you seem to think that the city is beholden to you, I ask you to realize that it is the other way around. Pittsburgh does not need you, Mr. Barden. You need Pittsburgh.

With that in mind, it is time for you to recognize that leading design and planning experts in this city have raised well-founded concerns about your plans. You must make a good-faith effort to address those concerns in an open, honest, polite and thorough manner. That simply has not happened thus far. This project must not be allowed to proceed until the concerns raised about the size and design of your parking garage have been adequately addressed.

ROB HENNING
Squirrel Hill

---

Obstructionists finally noted as obstructionists -- finally! And it took an out-of-town businessman to state the fact ("Casino Owner Won't Heed 'Ridiculous' Design Request," Dec. 11).

Our city has continuously stalled in development as other cities rage forward in progress. We can't get anything built, and Pittsburgh continues to be behind the times. Some obstructionist always comes up with a reason to halt a new idea or a progressive plan. "It's dated, we can't replace that"; "Another study is needed"; "This new building is negatively impacting my 50-year-old business nobody comes to"; "That won't work here." It's always something.

From Mellon Arena to buildings along Fifth Avenue, there is always a reason not to move forward in this city. Then all of the Pittsburghers sit around and scratch their heads as their kids graduate from college and leave town. We ridiculously blame our problems on a lack of immigrant population. There is definitely a positive note to Mr. Barden finally saying that, no, we're moving forward ... This is ridiculous and some are obstructionists! Perhaps this needs to be stated more frequently.

Our city needs to get out of the 1986 "Most Livable City" mentality; that is gone. Downtown needs improvement. Let's finally try to move forward and give our kids a city that is comparable with others and worth staying in. I know I want mine to stay.

ENRICO T. BRUSCHI
North Fayette

---

I think we are starting to see the real Don Barden; he doesn't care about the community ("Casino Owner Won't Heed 'Ridiculous' Design Request," Dec. 11). I had planned on going to his casino but now will just go to the Meadows.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl should keep fighting the stupid garage and not let money sway him. We don't need Mr. Barden.

JIM BYRNES
Bethel Park

---

Four Dec. 4 letters in the Post-Gazette objected to new taxes on poured drinks and on car rentals by Allegheny County.

Their unanimous recommendation was to decrease spending. Instead, government expenses need to be increased to maintain and improve essential services, notably public transportation.

I agree with the denunciations of the new taxes. They will deter visits to and expenditures in Allegheny County, thereby further diminishing the revenues that support government services. An alternative source of additional revenue for Allegheny County, also for its municipalities and school districts, is to use the most recent property assessments instead of the 2002 assessments.

Recent increase in assessed value of a property is usually due to greater desirability of the neighborhood. The property owners in these neighborhoods have gained unearned enrichment. These fortunate owners can afford the higher property tax. Alternative taxes, such as on income and on sales, have the same disadvantage as taxation of poured drinks and car rentals. They impair the economy and decrease future government revenues.

HERBERT BARRY III
Oakland

---

Even though the imposition of the new drink tax and tax on vehicle rentals doesn't affect me directly, as I don't drink and never rent cars, the real heart of this issue is, will the overtaxing of citizens ever end?

Whatever happened to belt-tightening and making government accountable? Aren't we as individuals expected to live within our means? Does the taxpayer have to bail out every irresponsible segment of government each and every time they fall short or fail to adequately monitor spending?

Pittsburgh is about to begin celebrations for its 250th anniversary and the founding of our nation. Isn't it ironic that some 213 years ago Pittsburgh and Allegheny County were the center of another dispute regarding the taxing of alcohol? How sad it is that as we enter this period we seem to be reliving some of the mistakes of the past, like the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794.

EDWARD URBAN
Munhall

---

On March 13, 1996, in a primary school in Dunblane, Scotland, a man killed 16 children, wounded one and killed one teacher. It did not take the British government long to enforce legislation for stricter gun control laws. Tony Blair, who was opposition party leader at the time, said simply, "It is the civilized thing to do." There was no opposition and the laws passed. There have been no school shootings in the United Kingdom since the first tragedy.

Since 1996, there have been at least 39 school shootings in the United States. You can see a time line of school shootings worldwide by Googling "A Timeline of School Shootings Worldwide."

The shootings in public places in this country are reaching epidemic proportions, yet have you noticed that when reporters interview people who survive the shooting, they do not ask their opinion about the need to control guns? Also, have you noticed that to date there is no discussion among presidential candidates regarding gun control and that no reporter is introducing this subject into the debates?

I thought that surely after the massacre at Virginia Tech some student, parent or member of the faculty would lead a national drive to change our gun laws. But there has been silence.

Last week a teenager used an assault gun to kill people in a mall. Why should any civilian have the right to own an assault gun such as the ones used in the military? We really need to take a hard look at what guns are doing to our society. It's the civilized thing to do.

AURELIA SMELTZ
Mount Washington

---

This letter is in response to the Dec. 7 editorial "Gun Happy?" I'm astounded by the fallacy that guns are the problem in these situations. Guns are not the problem! The sociopath who kills innocent victims is the problem. Murder existed long before the gun. With that, the absence of guns would not create some "utopian" nonviolent culture.

The problem is rooted in values (or lack thereof) and self-centeredness. For a solution, we as a society must re-establish a sense of value for human life, accountability for ourselves and each other, and responsibility to uphold our laws and commitments. Otherwise, what consequences do we have with an individual who has no sense of value for life?

Taking away firearms will only make our citizens more vulnerable and embolden the criminals among us. Don't believe me? Check out the crime statistics for Britain and Australia after their firearms bans in 1996-1997. Violent crime has dramatically escalated in these countries. As Americans it's not only our right to protect ourselves, it's our responsibility.

What's further and most important to me is this: If we repeal the Second Amendment to the Constitution, it's likely just a matter of time before we can kiss the rest of the Bill of Rights goodbye. With that, are we so removed from tyranny as we think? Is it now safe to start revoking our rights -- rights for which many have paid the ultimate price? I think not. I'd rather take my chances at the mall.

GARY HAYDEN
Renfrew

---

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.