tbo: Tampa Bay Online.
Friday, Apr 20, 2018
  • Home
Letters To The Editor

Letters to the editor: Bias showing

Bias showing In response to the article about the toddler being shot after finding a loaded gun: Your paper can be so biased, it is ridiculous. Gun safety is the responsibility of the gun owner. Your paper seems to blame everything else. Common sense goes a long way, and your anti-gun view is so blatant you have lost focus on reporting fairly. You emphasize your views while the other views are printed with less emphasis. And ending the article with Art Hayhoe of the Florida Coalition to Stop Gun Violence saying it’s “going to get worse” has nothing to do with responsible firearms storage. Stephen Burchett Seffner
It stinks In the words of Hillary Clinton, “What does it matter?” Well, it matters to the mother of the slain Marine. It matters to our troops, who know they could have mobilized to help and now they have to live with the fact they had to sit on their hands and watch their brothers be slain because of orders from above. It matters to the American people, who were fed a lie over and over, including from President Obama, who referenced to it during his speech at the United Nations. It matters because our relationship with Libya was damaged, resulting in an unsecured embassy for 18 days because the FBI couldn’t get in as a result of the talking points, and important evidence was lost. It matters to the CIA, which told the truth and couldn’t get that truth told. It matters to the morale of our troops. It matters that Obama could have ordered reinforcements immediately, regardless of any cuts. It matters, because this stinks and appears to have been a political decision to have Obama re-elected. It matters, people. And that’s only the talking points. The rest smells even worse. Lil Taylor Lithia Missed opportunity As Gordon Finley notes, Gov. Rick Scott’s veto of a bipartisan alimony reform bill missed an opportunity to improve the state’s business climate (“Business deterrent,” Your Views, May 9). Florida courts have discouraged the creation of small businesses through one-sided alimony rulings that ratchet alimony up but not down. They are far more eager to increase people’s alimony obligations when their new business succeeds than to cut their alimony when their new business fails, even though both success and failure affect people’s income and their ability to pay alimony. Since most new businesses fail, this is a potent disincentive to taking the risk of creating a new business. Thus, Scott erred in claiming that “current Florida law already provides for the adjustment of alimony under the proper circumstances.” Hans Bader Washington, D.C. Red-light appeals At last the Legislature has come up with a great idea. By charging to appeal a red-light ticket, they have made an important step in collecting revenue due the localities having these cameras. But as with many laws, they didn’t go far enough. Why stop with red-light cameras? Why not play double or nothing with all appeals, both civil and criminal? Imagine if a person sentenced to a one-year prison term appeals. If he wins he walks free; if he loses, his sentence is doubled to two years. I am sure if this measure is taken that the number of appeals would drop dramatically. This would unclog the courts, resulting in untold savings in court costs. After all, justice is not an issue; why should you be able to appeal a prison sentence and not a traffic ticket without incurring a penalty? Only in the cases of traffic courts are the rules of justice suspended. Harry Chamberlain Spring Hill

The writer is a senior attorney for the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Weather Center