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

DATE: FRIDAY, June 9, 1995                   TAG: 9506140010
SECTION: EDITORIALS                    PAGE: A-18   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

OBSTRUCTING LIFE-SAVING LEGISLATION

I THOUGHT it was April Fool's Day in May when I read that Philip Morris had recalled cigarettes because they contained potentially harmful ingredients. Is this not the same industry that was forced last year to disclose a secret list of 599 chemicals added to cigarettes, including ammonia and insecticides?

Particularly ironic is the list of potential symptoms cited. According to Philip Morris, the cigarette filters could cause smokers to have ``eye, nose and throat irritation, dizziness, coughing and wheezing.''

Welcome to the club! These are exactly the same symptoms nonsmokers experience when forced to inhale a smoker's filth. The Environmental Protection Agency has classified secondhand smoke as a ``Class A carcinogen'' on the same level as asbestos, estimating that it kills 50,000 nonsmoking Americans each year.

The industry is ably assisted by such legislators as Del. C. Richard Cranwell and Sen. Malfourd W. ``Bo'' Trumbo, who have voted against strong legislation to restrict smoking in public. House Majority Leader Cranwell has received many thousands of tobacco dollars for his help in obstructing such measures.

The tobacco industry is the world's largest drug cartel. Until our state and federal governments treat it as such, it will continue to kill one in five Americans.

HILTON OLIVER

Executive Director, Virginia Group to Alleviate Smoking in Public

VIRGINIA BEACH

Boss may be the firefighters' problem

REGARDING the May 21 Horizon section article, "Vinton fights raging internal fire":

I live in Vinton, and feel fortunate to have the fire and emergency-services protection that we have. However, information in the article disturbs me. It stated, "In Vinton's case, the petty arguments have gnawed away at the company's ability to work effectively and attract new volunteers, some say.''

The fact that a career fire captain resigns his job should be a red flag to indicate a serious problem. Why would one who has trained extensively and chosen this as his profession resign from such a high-ranking position? Perhaps lack of cooperation somewhere in the chain of command?

Speaking of the chain of command, why would a volunteer fire chief be in charge of paid career firefighters? Perhaps the problem isn't rivalry between paid career firefighters and volunteer firefighters, but that a volunteer commands both and has somewhat biased opinions.

A common feeling is that volunteers in any organization resent the fact that they do similar or same work as others, but for no pay. But volunteers choose whether to respond to calls, select their schedules, work their regular jobs and volunteer at their convenience. Career firefighters do not choose their schedules. While on duty, they can't choose whether to respond to calls, and they cannot work at their own convenience.

If career and volunteer firefighters would think of the importance of both, maybe there would be less bickering and more cooperation. The goal for both groups should be to provide the best possible service in the fastest amount of time to citizens. Their job duties are similar, and both groups would benefit if they worked together instead of against each other.

One last observation: Quotations posted in the offices indicate there is an attitude problem. But is it with the paid and volunteer firefighters or their ``fearless leader,'' the chief? Vinton should look at why career firefighters are quitting (two since the first of the year). Maybe the answer isn't resentment among workers, but rather the inability of management to address and solve problems.

KAREN S. RAWLING

VINTON

The security rules were not iffy

REGARDING the behavior of a female security person (May 24 article, ``Guard reprimanded over security measures''):

Would there have been any reprimand had the guard checking identification been a male?

Should or would a U.S. marshal and a federal judge be above the law? Or is there one law for people on the lower end of the employment ladder, exempting others above?

There is no way a law can be eased into. A new rule or regulation has a date of effectiveness when the paper work arrives.

Doing one's job to the letter of the law, as did Security Guard Jackie Taylor, has left several people with egg on the face.

PAT BOSHELL

ROANOKE

by CNB