Faux cameras would do the job
Re: the May 18 article "County's speed cameras might go."
A simple solution at a greatly reduced cost to the county is to deactivate all of the speed cameras currently under contract with the exception of two. The two being at the most dangerous intersections. The rest of the cameras can remain where they are but not active.
If the company will not agree to sell the existing cameras to the county, the county can purchase replicas on the Internet that are identical to the ones there. Of course this system will have to be implemented at the highest security level in the county.
Who will know?
Speed cameras don't reduce speeding
Re: the May 29 letter to the editor "Rethink possible move to yank speed cams."
Speed cameras make people slow down? Only in the few spots where the cameras are. The issue is whether or not people are slowing down where there are no cameras. My experience says they are not.
I drive daily through several camera zones. It's the same routine through each - people speed before they get to the camera warning signs, apply their brakes (it looks like a sea of red from behind), and resume speeding once on the other side.
Infrequently, I witness policemen with radar a short distance on the far side of the camera zones. They pull over one driver after another.
Would those chastising Mr. Huckelberry please explain how the speed cameras are reducing the general speeding problem in Tucson? I say, take 'em down.
Call 'graffiti artists' what they are: vandals
If someone disfigures a building with a can of spray paint, he is called a "graffiti artist," and some misguided people will even provide a spot for him to practice his art. If someone goes out and paints some cacti, he becomes a vandal.
In actual fact, they are all vandals and should be treated as such.
I suppose this sort of thinking is why some other group of law breakers are called "undocumented immigrants."
Wouldn't it be better if we would just stick with plain English?
Consign the tea party to history's coal bin
Re: the May 23 article "Cheering TMC crowd hears Brewer pitch wider AHCCCS."
Gov. Jan Brewer came to national prominence as an arch conservative with her anti-immigration stance and her acrimonious opposition to all things Obama. She has vociferously attacked Obamacare and is a darling of the tea party, but now she realizes that an expansion of Medicaid would be good for Arizona.
Her position, supported by the business community, hospitals and religious leaders, has turned her into a target by our Republican legislators. Obviously, in the next election the tea party must be consigned to the coal bin of history.
Social worker, Tucson
Clement column a nice change of pace
Re: the May 29 guest column by Nicolas Clement "My advice to the class of 2013: Keep on dancing."
Finally, a school superintendent with something positive to say! After all these months of TUSD and Sunnyside muckraking, it's nice to read something that doesn't turn my stomach. I'll keep dancing, Mr. Clement, even if it's only in my mind.
Religious beliefs aren't relevant in Legislature
Re: the May 23 article "AZ House debate: Did lawmaker deliver a nonprayer?"
Rep. Juan Mendez had the audacity to offer a respectful address to the assembly of elected officials instead of offering a meaningless standard prayer. He also referred to himself as an atheist, joining about 18 percent of American citizens who do not believe in God as described in the Bible.
He did not say that he does not believe in the laws of nature, nor did he marginalize any of the other believers. The negative comments by people who insisted on offering substitute prayers are really showing their poor judgment. This is not a proper response in a political setting.
When I vote, my only reason to elect any official is my belief that they will favorably represent my political and economic views. Their personal religious beliefs do not concern me unless they sway their votes contrary to my wishes. Keep God in church and out of politics.
Retired, Oro Valley