Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, September 29, 1994 TAG: 9410040038
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-14 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The article implied that USAir is being cheap by avoiding engine overhauls when they're merely trying to realize maximum utilization of equipment. One paragraph stated: ``On short flights, less thrust is needed because the planes aren't weighed down with as much fuel. The lower thrust rate means the engines don't run as hot and don't need to be refurbished as often.'' In other words, no, the engines didn't need an overhaul.
Aircraft engines are operated, inspected and repaired under federal guidelines because you can't simply pull over if something goes wrong with them. Also, each twin engine aircraft in USAir's fleet isn't only capable but is designed to fly on one engine should something go awry with the other. The engines are two separate entities. It's like having two engines in your car. If something goes wrong with one, it's extremely improbable that something will go wrong with the other.
Major U.S. airlines are governed by the strictest of federal regulations. If USAir's practice were unsafe, then it wouldn't be allowed. Yes, this is their fifth accident in five years, but the previous four weren't attributed to USAir and I doubt this one will be either.
Before people go pointing their finger at them, wait for the investigation's final revelations. If and when it comes out that they weren't at fault, I'm sure we won't see articles apologizing for having published misleading information that hurts a perfectly safe airline, and we'll still see attorneys attempting to rape the airline.
Yes, I'm sorry for the passengers, crews, their families and friends. But put blame where blame is due. Until the investigation is complete, this cannot be done.
CHARLES E. MARCUM
STANARDSVILLE
When America took Americans prisoner
REGARDING BUD Feuer's Sept. 15 letter to the editor concerning Japan's treatment of Americans during World War II (``Don't waste sympathy on Japan''):
There's no comparison whatsoever between American civilians interned by the Japanese government in foreign countries located in the Pacific war zone and Japanese-Americans interned in the United States. Feuer apparently fails to understand the distinction between a Japanese foreign national (a citizen of Japan) and a Japanese-American - an American citizen whose ancestry is Japanese, whether the person is American-born or a naturalized American citizen, and who has given up Japanese citizenship and sworn allegiance to the United States.
Japanese-Americans interned in ``virtual luxury,'' according to him, were American citizens, not Japanese. These American business-owners, workers, housewives and schoolchildren were forced out of their own homes, and imprisoned by the American government inside the United States. Their belongings were forfeited and their freedom stolen. They had committed no crime.
Perhaps if our government had also rounded up all Americans of German ancestry to ``protect'' this country from possible Hitler sympathizers, Feuer could have learned firsthand (or from his own parents and grandparents) exactly how ``luxurious'' the inside of an American prison camp actually was - not!
NANCY C. HARMAN
RINER
Allen's plan will free victims' families
WE TURN on our television or radio, we pick up a newspaper, and every day we hear of another violent crime against our neighbors or our friends. It used to be that violent crimes were something we heard about occasionally happening many miles away. But now it's the next town or next door, and it makes us feel unsafe and anxious.
There have to be many reasons for this, from moral decay to society's allowing its judicial system to make crime pay. Criminals brag that if they get caught today, they'll be out of prison tomorrow. They know the system better than law-abiding citizens do, and they're allowed to take advantage of this system. It simply has to stop. The violent criminal has to be made to accept what he's done, and to know that he'll be punished to the limit.
Too often, the victim's family seemingly ends up serving a greater prison sentence than the offender. They're imprisoned to a life of always wondering when the criminal will be set free, or spend their life pleading with the parole board to keep the offender in prison. They should be set free to live their life without this constant fear. Gov. Allen's parole-abolition and sentencing plan would free imprisoned victims and incarcerate the violent offender to the maximum. The power must be returned to law-abiding citizens, and stripped from those who choose to make a mockery of our laws.
PEGGY WHITE
PULASKI
Subverting a report on dangerous diets
A 2,000-page report published recently by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency concludes that dioxin levels in fatty tissues of Americans who consume meat, fish, eggs and dairy products pose significant health risks. These include elevated incidence of cancer, disruption of the immune and hormonal systems, sexual abnormalities, and stunted fetal growth. Dioxins are released by industrial processes, settle in soil and waterways, and accumulate in animal tissues. The conclusions are based on an exhaustive three-year review of dozens of medical studies.
The meat industry and allied government agencies are working to subvert the report's startling conclusions and to reduce their economic fallout. The National Cattlemen's Association, following the lead of the tobacco industry, complained of insufficient evidence. Earlier this year, an EPA assistant administrator, Lynn Goldman, assured reporters that ``the benefits [presumably the cholesterol and saturated fat in meat] of a balanced nutritional diet far outweigh the risk of dioxin.''
During the past two decades, hardly a month has passed without disclosure of another report linking consumption of animal fat and meat with elevated risk of heart failure, stroke, cancer, diabetes, atherosclerosis, immune disorders and other chronic diseases that each year maim and kill 1.5 million Americans. How many reports will it take before Americans turn to a plant-based diet? How many deaths?
ALEX HERSHAFT
ROANOKE
State should keep reins on alcohol
THE PRIVATIZATION of the state's Alcohol Beverage Control agency is a concern for me. I'm an employee, and will lose my job when the agency is made private. But that's only a small cost to me. The largest cost will be to families with children.
The projected outlook is that we'll go from 244 outlets for alcoholic beverages to 2,000. As a parent, this is a very big concern! If there will be 2,000 outlets, then they will be in every store you shop in with your children.
When children are exposed to this product every time they go in a store, they'll not view it in a responsible manner. They'll be exposed to people who don't act responsible when purchasing it. The likelihood of children shoplifting alcoholic products will also increase, and I think those in private industry will be more concerned with making a dollar than refusing sales because customers are underage.
At ABC, we refuse sales daily to underage customers. We check customer identifications if they appear to be 30 years of age or younger. We also require two IDs when a person is carded. Young people get alcoholic products by getting a friend or a stranger to make a purchase for them. But these are the exceptions. Most children are taught to obey rules from an early age, and do so.
By exposing them to this product, they'll view it as a common item and will treat it as such. There's nothing common about alcoholic beverages. Alcohol should be treated with a great amount of respect for what it can do to a person. By keeping it in the state's control, then it has the respect it deserves. Our children are taught in school about drugs, and alcohol is definitely a drug. Just as prescription drugs aren't on a shelf for children to pick up, don't put alcoholic beverages on a shelf either!
DONNA C. UNDERWOOD
BLUE RIDGE
Give felons hard time
I'M WRITING this letter in support of the effort to abolish parole. The average Virginian doesn't realize that the average violent felon only serves one-third of his sentence, and the average good time allowance is 300 days credit for every 365 days of incarceration. Why should violent felons be allowed this credit, and why not make them serve the full sentence? Today, many felons are released only to commit additional crimes. Now is the time to take action to keep convicted felons in jail.
EDWARD M. PAGE SR.
RIDGEWAY
by CNB