Trashing recycling a shortsighted move; make it more 0) efficient
Your article ("Recycling hasn't lived up to hype," May 25) on the economic failure of area curbside recycling was interesting and informative.
However, I believe it was also overly simplistic and sent a dangerous message to the reader that our recycling just does not work.
It is shortsighted to assume that because landfill space is readily available today, in the future there will not be sprawling acres of landfill material and more leachate in ground water. It is very important to strive toward more energy efficient production and less waste.
We need to re-evaluate our curbside system based on our 10 years of experience. Other environmental programs, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund, also suffered from a poor cost-benefit ratio. This does not mean that we should scrap the entire cleanup effort; we must make changes and improvements.
We should shift more of the burden for recycling product materials from government to the private sector where it was generated, such as the bottling industry and newspapers -- The Sun is the region's largest generator of newsprint -- and from government.
If private industry were required by law to collect and recycle materials, you can be sure that a very competitive market for recycled materials would result.
For instance, bottle bills requiring deposits on bottles, or an equivalent system of collection, have been effective in other areas.
The fact that Maryland may be recycling one-third of its garbage is very encouraging. It is our responsibility to future Marylanders to continue to reduce waste and refine our methods to optimize the cost benefit to today's citizens.
Remember to honor heroes on America's Memorial Day
Today, May 30, is the official day that we honor our veterans who served and died for our country so that we could retain the freedom we have cherished for more than 200 years.
Memorial Day comes once a year, and the least we can do is try to attend one of the services available in our communities to honor those who gave the supreme sacrifice for our country.
As time goes by, we tend to forget these heroes. Please remember them today.
Walter S. Kenton Sr.
I feel compelled to write to you in response to the letter ("Honor America's veterans by keeping them out of war," May 25).
The writer's view is sadly mistaken. It is the view held by many liberals who can't understand what it is that compels the men and women of our armed forces to give that most precious gift -- life -- for their country.
To equate their sacrifice to the anti-war protestors of the past and the present is to nullify at once the importance and necessity of honoring America's veterans.
While anti-war protesters were marching in the streets, burning the flag, tearing up draft cards, and running off to Canada, brave men and women were marching down jungle trails, treating burn victims in hospitals, getting torn apart by land mines, and running to the aid of their injured comrades.
To protest government policy is one thing, (a freedom we all enjoy, thanks to veterans), but to do so when our troops are far away on the field of battle dying is neither patriotic nor to be considered service to one's country.
It is my hope that anyone who feels otherwise comes to view the sacrifices of America's veterans, living and dead, with the respect and honor that they deserve.
Berrigans aided the enemy, not America's young people
I was surprised, shocked and dismayed to see the waste of newsprint and readers' time by your ill-advised article on the escapades of the infamous Berrigan brothers ("Siblings still protest after 3 decades," May 18).
Regardless of the alleged high principles of their actions, they were alternately jailbirds and fugitives from justice. Daniel Berrigan even had the temerity, when wanted by the FBI, to attend a Methodist church in Rhode Island, where he should have been arrested.
Daniel Berrigan's exultations over destroying public records to keep young people from going to Vietnam to "kill or be killed" completely overlook that many other young people had to take the places of those he claims to have protected.
The Berrigans and their ilk also cost many lives in Vietnam by giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Whatever may be said about them, they were criminals as I would be if I were to ignore the Internal Revenue Service or otherwise shatter our laws.
Frank B. Hall
Time to hold gun owners accountable for violence
It is so sad to read about another teen-ager gone mad with a gun, causing so much human suffering and needless tragedy in our public schools.
I firmly believe that many of these shootings would be less frequent if every gun owner would be required to have a child-proof safety lock.
How did all these teen-agers and 11-year-olds get these guns and operate them? If these were stolen guns, why weren't they equipped with safety locks?
Granted, although people steal locked cars, locking automobiles reduces theft.
Why are not gun owners sued like automobile owners if accidents happen? Guns are just as dangerous as automobiles but, unfortunately, are too available, and no one is held responsible for these tragedies.
Lawyers, get busy. This is a loud and clear wake-up call. Gun owners should be required to carry liability insurance. All it takes is one stinging lawsuit.
Ruth Von Bramer
When is this idiotic idolizing of guns going to meet an all-too-late demise? When will the National Rifle Association at long last mean No Rifles Allowed? When will little boys have dear old dads who provide them with better values than that meaningless macho nonsense: "Here's a gun, now shoot at something"?
When will that marvel of our age -- television -- dramatize killing less? When will the idea that "guns aren't the problem, people are" be reconsidered?
At this point in our evolution, it looks like never.
$Virginia H.S. Hoffmaster
E-mail harassment law goes too far, tramples rights
Unfortunately, the article by Michael Dresser on the new Maryland e-mail harassment law does not adequately describe the full extent of that law and might lead people to believe that there was nothing wrong with it ("New Md. law will ban harassment by e-mail," May 21).
If that legislation had settled for outlawing harassment via e-mail, I would have no objection. But it went beyond that and pandered to prudes by including language about what it calls "lewd, lascivious, or obscene" material.
Our Big Brother in Maryland would be empowered to decide what this means and impose possible penalties of a $500 fine and one year in jail.
I cannot understand how anyone who truly cares about our First Amendment right to freedom of expression could have supported, much less sponsored, this legislation. The blue-nosed puritans in our midst may be happy, but Del. Samuel Rosenberg and Sen. Patrick J. Hogan will get no praise from me for their actions regarding this matter.
Kenneth A. Stevens
The writer is coordinator of the American Civil Liberties Union in Howard County.
To punish Sheinbein, keep him out of U.S.
The Samuel Sheinbein Saga continues.
My question: Who wants him back?
The cost of trying him, of trying his appeals and of his lifelong incarceration will be enormous.
Israel wants him? Great! It can have him. Order him permanently barred from entry into this country. That is punishment enough. And we taxpayers save many millions of dollars that will otherwise end up in lawyers' pockets.
Kirk S. Nevin
Pub Date: 5/30/98