
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: MONDAY, February 6, 1995                   TAG: 9502080003
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-4   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

CONSIDER THE VICTIMS' FAMILIES

I COMMEND your staff writer, Cody Lowe, for his balanced and informative reporting of Dana Edmonds' execution (Jan. 26 news story, ``Killer's death quick, silent and troubling''). Executions shouldn't be taken lightly, and Lowe portrayed this event with the gravity it deserved. Most important, if he's opposed to capital punishment, he didn't inflict his view on those who don't share it.

In contrast, your Jan. 21 editorial (``Killing them softly'') arrogantly proclaimed that capital punishment is a ``moral offense.'' By extension, you judge and condemn the morals of those who, in good conscience, support capital punishment. Included among these are members of the family of Edmonds' victim, who expressed their desire that he be executed. You owe them an apology, not only for the editorial, but also for the tear-jerking companion story (``Ghosts will walk him home'' from Landmark News Service) depicting Edmonds' unfortunate childhood. Were you trying to make them feel guilty for desiring his execution?

Victims' families receive no consideration from opponents of capital punishment. Every argument against capital punishment is wafted from a supposed moral high road, while the victims' families are given short shrift. Imagine the continuing anguish of knowing that the murderer of a loved one languishes in prison, eating reasonably decent food, exercising, watching television, maybe even seeing a counselor for alleviation of any emotional distress that may ensue. Not even the general public should be forced to contemplate the maintenance of someone like Edmonds in prison for the rest of his life.

Capital-punishment opponents are very quick to point out that life imprisonment is the cheaper alternative, given the high legal costs associated with arranging an execution. Well, in Edmonds' case, I believe the money was well spent.

ROBERT B. FRARY

BLACKSBURG

Issue on campaign finance dodged

IN A RECENT ``Face the Nation'' response, Sen. Bob Dole claimed he didn't sense much interest in campaign-finance control.

S-m-o-o-th! By inference, he left the impression it wouldn't be addressed soon, and then he was allowed to get away without being asked to take a position on whether it is needed. Subsequently, it now appears Republicans aren't including this legislation in their hit list for rapid enactment. And until we can count the Democrats' votes, we won't be sure where they stand.

Looks like we need to reaffirm with all our representatives that our trust in them and subsequent votes for any office they aspire to are contingent on their support now for legislative sanctions against political-action committees' buying of votes, and the pocketing of unused campaign contributions by legislative winners or losers.

GORDON F. OSTERHAUS

ROANOKE

No stalkers at convenience stores

REGARDING the Jan. 24 letter to the editor by James Lowe, ``Why should the state protect clinics?'':

Convenience-store clerks aren't stalked by fanatics, and do not receive death threats in the mail or over the phone for selling cigarettes and gas. Many pro-lifers approve of stopping doctors at any cost. These doctors, their employees and patients deserve protection.

TIMOTHY C. CASTOR

CHRISTIANSBURG

Democrats wouldn't want Warner

IN RESPONSE to the Jan. 19 letter to the editor by Alberta Atkinson (``Would GOP snub Nancy Reagan, too?'') concerning great recognition and praise for Sen. John Warner, which was not offered at a recent GOP banquet:

It's obvious the letter writer is missing something very important - loyalty. The Republican Party has supported Warner, and this is the reason he is where he is today. The party rule is to support the candidate who wins the party's nomination.

Warner is a traitor to the Republican Party and all conservatives. He spoke out against Mike Farris in favor of Democrat Don Beyer, and threw Marshall Coleman into the Senate race so that his friend Charles Robb would win. Warner would fit in with the liberal Democrats. However, they wouldn't trust him because he's proved to be a traitor to his own party.

Regarding the headline on the letter, the GOP would snub Nancy Reagan, too! Well, why not? Unless you believe decisions should be made by sorcery and Ouija boards.

ERNESTINE B. FRITH

RADFORD

Media should revisit the Brady bill

WHY have the news media not said anything about the Supreme Courts of five different states (Arizona, Mississippi, Montana, Vermont and Louisiana) ruling that the Brady bill is unconstitutional?

Could it be that the media are one-sided, and it wouldn't be politically correct to state the whole story?

RODNEY METHENY

VINTON

by CNB