From: Dorothy Coster
I strongly protest the 400 percent increase in the cost of classes for senior citizens, as well as the minimum requirement of 17 participants.
I recognize the financial problems of the college but believe a gradual increase is in order. Also, if a person would like to take more than one course (which I do), this should be taken into consideration, that is, two or more classes for a little less.
TIME TO GET TOUGH ON DRUNKEN DRIVERS
From: Frederick Everhart
Every year, thousands of friends and relatives mourn the deaths and maiming of their loved ones by the actions of drunken drivers. This is a grief that lasts throughout the life of the survivors. The public has been continuously exposed to the educational format: Don't drink and drive. Anyone who has not heard that message is not competentto possess a driver's license.
Seymour B. Stern, president of theMaryland State Bar Association, apparently feels that this educational thrust is insufficient.
He writes that the compassionate "judges are granting PBJs and sending drunk drivers to alcohol and drug abuse treatment centers where they will receive help to overcome their disease. Judges are not to be looked upon as lenient, but instead should be seen as rehabilitating through treatment and education." ("PBJ sentences help stop drunken driving recidivists," Jan. 6.)
The message: A drunken driver is a helpless creation who has absolutely no control over that first drink and his car keys. Do not be overly concerned about that first drunken driving ticket, as in all likelihood itresults in a PBJ with nary a point. So look out, motorists, the courts would have you believe that the one who would do you in is the victim. Now, that is a real deterrent.
Published notice is consideredto be legally binding notice in many applications of the law. "Don'tDrink and Drive" has certainly saturated every sober driver's mind.
Alcoholics may need treatment, but that is after the fact. Furthermore, every drunken driver is not necessarily an alcoholic.
Our lenient judges may have good intentions, but it is time for their position to be re-evaluated. If the courts really wanted to get serious about this situation, the message would be: The penalty for drinking and driving is a jail sentence and loss of drivers license without qualification.
No PBJs, no exceptions! Judicially recognize the real victims of this crime. The life this saves may be your own.
PROVIDE EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL ANIMALS
From: Beckie Peyton
Inresponse to Wendy Feaga's letter on Jan. 2 ("Large deer population poses risk of disease"), I totally disagree with you. You stated that if the deer were eliminated, "the (deer) tick is more likely to move to us and our pets."
Are you saying that you and your pets are more important than deer? If so, you're wrong. Deer are living, feeling beings and should not exist for the purpose of protecting humans fromdisease.
I felt that your statement that we should allow "huntersto remind the deer that people occasionally hurt them so they keep their distance" was disgusting. No animal should be killed for any reason, especially for something so stupid as so that other animals will"keep their distance" from humans. The planet isn't that big, and itmust be shared equally among all species.
As for your comment, "We need to keep wild animals wild so they are not concentrated right in our backyards," I don't understand how you can say that. Humans have been trying to control life on earth since the beginning of their existence by eliminating other animal species. Every animal that we know has been hunted for some reason.
Remember that other animals have been around much longer than humans, and they aren't kicking us off our land; we're kicking them off theirs. The earth doesn't belong to humans and we should start thinking about the other beings on earth besides ourselves.