LETTERS: Justifiable homicide bill lacking logic

To the editor:

State Sen. Michael Roberson’s advocacy of Senate Bill 175, which would extend civil immunity provisions to car incidents, lacks logic and courts more deaths related to road rage or drive-by shootings (“Bill expands justifiable homicide defense to vehicles,” Feb. 26 Review-Journal). There is no good reason to endorse this bill, and many factual and logical reasons to oppose it.

One causal factor for road rage is the wide roadways we have, with many main arteries three lanes in each direction. While the speed is usually listed as 45 mph, it is not unusual for vehicles to travel 60 mph on these roads. Therefore, it’s very easy for people to not be able to judge how quickly an oncoming vehicle will arrive, and for vehicles to pull out and find the speeding vehicle braking and honking.

When incidents like that occur, there is a reaction of visceral fear, a sense that one nearly had an accident that could have caused their death because the other driver misjudged. The adrenalin is pumping and anger ensues. As long as we have these kinds of roads and speeds, road rage is an ever-present reality. So why would we want to encourage people to think that those circumstances are like those in which someone invades their home, and that it is OK to solve the issue with guns?

Ask officials in older cities, such as Berkeley, Calif. — where the roads are narrow and the speed limit is usually 25 mph — how many cases of road rage they have on city streets, as opposed to the nearby highways.

We already have numerous cases of gunfire from cars at people in other cars or in homes. To give people some rationale that a law justifies these as self-defense promotes not exploring any other solution to problems and gives the lack of impulse control a legal cover. The tone-deafness of this advocacy coming on the heels of a highly publicized shooting that was characterized as road rage is astounding. As the details of that shooting unfold it looks more like people using guns to solve problems before exploring nonviolent solutions.

We do not want to give people with low impulse control or poor coping skills the appearance of legal cover for solving things quickly with a gun.

GENEVIEVE MCNEILL CEBE

LAS VEGAS

Charter school proposal

To the editor:

Either the author of the Feb. 27 Review-Journal editorial does not live near the area in question or is not cognizant of the traffic situation. The area surrounding the intersection of Green Valley Parkway and Horizon Ridge Parkway is congested and chaotic at best. Once a day or more, the traffic heading south is so heavy that vehicles trying to turn east or make a U-turn cannot access the left turn lanes. The lanes are blocked by the vehicles going straight. I have witnessed impatient drivers jump the median to get to their desired lane.

The author adds more reasons not to build any school in this area by listing several other building plans which will inflate the already dangerously congested traffic. Perhaps a better place to build a school is one in which the students are not put in the middle of this kind of peril.

CONNIE MELCHER

HENDERSON

Public school calendar

To the editor:

Regarding the editorial on Senate Bill 119 (“Make the grade,” March 3 Review-Journal), perhaps before our elected representatives jump on Gov. Brian Sandoval’s bandwagon about building new schools, particularly in Clark County, maybe they should ask themselves a few questions.

Excluding Sundays, schools are occupied only 64 percent of the time. Why? Could any business survive being open for such a short time span? I think not. Maybe our well-dressed elite can get their minds out of the dark ages and start thinking and asking 21st-century questions, such as:

— Why are schools closed in the summertime? Our agrarian calendar need not be followed any longer.

— Why can’t kids go to school on Saturdays? Most of their parents work that day.

— Why don’t kids go to school eight hours per day? Aren’t we trying to get them acclimated to the real world of work?

— Why do we give kids two weeks off at Christmas? Wouldn’t Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day be sufficient?

— Why do we have spring break? Wouldn’t Good Friday suffice?

If Saturdays were added to the school year or if the school day were increased to eight hours, and if the above mentioned holidays and the nine-week summer hiatus were eliminated, we could easily add a minimum of 120 teaching days to the school year.

Start thinking trimester rather than semester. We could easily accommodate one-third more students than we currently do. We don’t have a shortage of classrooms; we have a breakdown of common sense. Why doesn’t anyone think outside the box anymore?

WILLIAM TROEGER

LAS VEGAS