Editorial insulted firefightersYour editorial of Oct. 17...

Letters

November 02, 1997

Editorial insulted firefighters

Your editorial of Oct. 17, "Generation gap at the firehouse," regarding the incident of the Anne Arundel County fire captain was an insult to firefighters.

You imply that paramedics are younger and better educated than their firefighting colleagues.

Your statement that firefighting is not a dominant duty is ridiculous, as is the statement that paramedics are angry because they make less money than their superiors.

Believe it or not, many firefighters are also college-educated and must keep up with advances in technology to protect the public.

I think you owe firefighters a huge apology.

Thank God for these brave men. What would we do without them?

Dorothy Moritz

Baltimore

Keep learning standards high

Shocking me from the article about "Homework guidelines approved" on Oct. 15 was the statement that "a weightier final would raise standards and expectations for students."

To me, the statement reads that high standards are a bad thing and some students would have difficulty with a weightier test.

Whether my interpretation is correct is irrelevant. Standardizing (lowering) the qualifications of such tests only accomplishes one thing: Society degrades in learning and achievement.

Why is the trend of standardizing so popular? The weak do not improve, and are carried, and the strong are almost looked down upon for ruining the standard.

To excel, our standards must remain excellent. Standardizing does not allow for a "ladder of success," but rather a tabletop of mediocrity. We should not carry or "mother" weak testing students. Get them a tutor or give them a "D."

Let the hard-working students continue to climb the ladder. As parents we should not teach our children to meet a standard. Challenge them constantly.

Robert C. Erickson III

Annapolis

NRA would support life without parole

Joe Siamon, in his Oct. 22 letter titled, "Shouldn't grant parole if a weapon is used," would like all criminals who commit a crime with any weapon to be locked up for life without chance of parole.

The premise is that this measure would eliminate violent crime. The unspoken foundation of his argument is betrayed by his insinuation that the National Rifle Association and gun manufacturers would oppose such extreme measures.

This indirectly lays the blame of all violence in society at the feet of the millions of responsible gun owners in particular and on proponents of the Second Amendment in general, a thinly veiled attack at best.

His assertion that the NRA would oppose such a measure is probably correct, but other groups not primarily concerned with the right to bear arms would also oppose such extreme measures, groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Opposition to such extreme measures does not imply approval of violence.

Rather, opposition to the "life imprisonment without parole" option could be a recognition that the root cause of crime in general is not the availability of a weapon, be it gun, club, knife or spear, but rather the social conditions that exist that make the pursuance of criminal activities attractive.

Joseph Ferrari

Millersville

Sun's ballet critic didn't get 'Dracula'

After reading Judith Green's review of Ballet Theatre of Annapolis' "Dracula", I regret that Baltimore does not have a professional ballet company of its own so Ms. Green would not have to travel to Annapolis to find a target for her caustic comments.

We Annapolitans, small-town as we are, packed Maryland Hall for the Creative Arts and rose to our feet to applaud this wonderful evening of ballet.

Ms. Green asks, "Why, when Dracula is caped and cavalier . . . do his ladies . . . wear thigh-high mini-dresses?"

His ladies are vamps, complete with permed hair, black eye makeup, tawdry clothes and seductive moves.

Could there be other delightful aspects of this production that Ms. Green missed?

Caroline Christensen

Annapolis

Sun should criticize umpires, not Orioles

I'm writing to complain about all of the critical commentaries made by The Sun columnists regarding the Orioles' loss in the American League Championship Series.

The Orioles gave the Baltimore fans one heck of a superlative year, especially considering illnesses and injuries to key players. Davey Johnson and his crew ought to be praised for their efforts.

If the ALCS outcome had been decided by the players' actions on the field, instead of by questionable umpiring, the Orioles would have challenged the Florida Marlins in the World Series.

The vast majority of close calls, and almost every outrageous or controversial call, went against the Orioles.

Could it be Hirshbeck's Revenge? Or is it the very obvious incompetence of Richie Phillips' elite umpiring crew? A little of both, I think.

Let's go back to the days when the best umpires were selected for the championship series. I'll wait for computerized umpiring before I go to or watch another baseball game.

Ron Parsons

Glen Burnie

When will all the investigations end?

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.