Yesterday’s kids could tell reality from make-believe

Neal Graham’s Jan. 11 letter, "Connecting the dots" between media violence and spree killings, just doesn’t add up for me.

Born in London, England, in 1948, my friends and I played amongst the ruins of bombed-out houses and factories. Our game was always killing Germans and Japanese, and our "boys comics" were dominated by war stories and the heroes who courageously slaughtered the hated Nazis and "Japs."

Comics didn’t have the graphic qualities of today’s video games, but they were the young-mind influencers of the time, and we read them endlessly, just as today’s youngsters might play their higher-tech versions. Corporal punishment at home, at school and when I joined the military at age 16 was an accepted norm.

Yet I’ve never killed anybody, nor do I wish to. (Well, maybe Democrats – just kidding!) I was equipped with the knowledge and emotional intelligence to understand the difference between play/fantasy and reality, to accept "losing" without feeling it made me a lesser person and to recognize that violence for the sake of violence was an aberration.

This must have come from my parents, the many "uncles" and "aunts" who lived on our street, my teachers and maybe even from my friends. When looking for a solution to these terrible killings, I really do believe that education from parents, teachers and the wider community is the place to start.

GRAHAM H. TYE

NORTH LAS VEGAS

If tyrants have them

To the editor:

Let’s face it, the founders didn’t create the Second Amendment to allow people to kill defenseless, unarmed schoolchildren. The Second Amendment was created to allow people to kill well-armed government tyrants.

In 1776, that meant allowing the people to have swords, flintlock rifles and canon. In 2013, it means allowing the people to have machine guns, rocket launchers, anti-tank guns and all the other weapons the well-armed government tyrants have.

MIKE ROSS

TEMPE, ARIZ.

He had to take over

To the editor:

According to Jim Andreas in the Tuesday letters section, President Barack Obama, with the support and encouragement of Sen. Harry Reid, is bypassing the will of the people by suggesting he will use executive power to boost the debt ceiling.

I don’t know one person outside the U.S. House of Representatives whose will is to crash the American economy by not paying our bills.

The House of Representatives is given the responsibility by the Constitution to manage matters of money. When the lower chamber shirks its duty and refuses to act responsibly, it becomes the job of the president to find a way around this roadblock and enact an alternative for our country’s well-being.

Mr. Obama has had to do this before. Earlier this month, the House once again refused to act on its fiscal responsibility to avert the recent "fiscal cliff." When they became paralyzed, the president agreed that the Senate and the Vice President should take the reins and solve the tax issue. The president’s leadership and the Senate’s ability to act saved the day.

Now, again, the president has to take over the responsibilities of the House by finding a way to raise the debt ceiling in an alternative way. It’s not tyranny, it’s leadership.

TERRY J. DONNELLY

MESQUITE

They hate children

To the editor:

I was appalled around this time last year by the conservative right’s take on free lunches at school. It seems that the right will take any chance they can get to maintain the social order, even if it means stigmatizing kids.

I know there have been some blunders this year that have revealed some darker undertones of this group’s mind-set. But this school lunch debate shows the bellicosity of this group and their stride to leave no stone unturned in their attempt to squeeze an important and crucial social program of public education.

Now, if I were going to be stuck in a capitalist propaganda camp for eight hours (school), I at least demand a hot lunch. Right-wing conservatives have a bad reputation of being, well, too conservative. Just when you thought they had stigmatized every demographic, someone decided that kids are all right because their vote doesn’t matter right now.

SANTIAGO VASQUEZ

LAS VEGAS

Not alive

To the editor:

In Monday’s Review-Journal, Alan Galins compares the mass killing of children in Newtown with abortions.

First of all, Mr. Galins, just because you believe that life begins at conception doesn’t make it so. I happen to believe that life begins at birth. No one can say which of us is right, but to compare the murder of a 6-year-old child to abortion to justify not fixing our gun laws is just wrong, whatever you believe.

GAYE DEEN

LAS VEGAS

Confused

To the editor:

I’m confused.

Tuesday’s front-page article on the abuse of a diabetic man who police thought was driving under the influence reported officers were placed on paid leave pending investigation. Then we have a Henderson police officer arrested last week on suspicion of DUI after a minor accident also put on paid leave pending investigation.

Don’t our taxes pay the salaries of these officers? I vehemently object to this use of our tax dollars, whether it’s for DUI or using force on people about to be arrested.

If anyone else was picked up for DUI, they would be hauled off to jail and would probably lose their job. If we were DUI and stopped, we would not be sent home and told by the officer that he would investigate whether or not we were driving drunk and he would get back to us later. So where does "pending investigation" come into play regarding our police officers?

I love the double standards for the police officers vs. the private citizens here in Henderson.

JUDY BUCK

HENDERSON