Shooting was justified

This letter is in regard to the shooting during a robbery attempt in Stateline recently (“Robber carrying air pistol killed,” Dec. 28). I’m sure I will offend “bleeding hearts” with what I say, but so be it.

I’m not totally unfeeling; therefore, I extend my sympathy to the family of Mr. Joseph Hatchie. They lost a husband, father, son, brother, etc. It is tragic. No question about that.

However, the clerk was justified in using lethal force. A gun was pointed at him. He had no way of knowing it was only a pellet gun. Even when you cooperate with a robber they sometimes shoot you to eliminate witnesses to the crime, so the clerk, no doubt, felt he might die that night. It was kill or be killed.

Hopefully the prosecutor rules it self-defense. Unfortunately, even if that happens, the clerk can still be sued by the family. I know in life lawsuits are sometimes necessary, but too often courts reward people for bad choices, such as the one Mr. Hatchie made.

Aaron Mendenhall

Spokane

Clerk did the right thing

I’ve been reading about Jeffrey Hayes. I can understand how he feels upset about the tragedy (“Store clerk shaken by shooting,” Dec. 30). However, any person who has a gun shoved into his chest has the right to defend himself in any manner possible.

So the guy had lost his job, had medical bills, was facing eviction and had kids. How did that become Jeffrey’s problem?

A lot of people are out of work and facing hard times. I haven’t heard of any decent people resorting to violence to get themselves out of a jam. He did the crime and he paid for it. That will be the last time he sticks a gun in anyone’s chest and demands money.

I hope there is some counseling available for Jeffrey. All he did was defend himself. The store owner should give Jeffrey a big bonus.

Hang in there – you did the right thing.

Penny Johnson

Spokane

Ivins ignorant on minimum wage

We are once again blessed ad nauseam by the wisdom of Molly Ivins citing the lack of a livable minimum wage, ignoring the fact that it was intended to be an entry wage designed to give unskilled workers an opportunity to get into the job market to learn job skills and to prepare them for higher paying employment (“2005 filled with political blunders,” Dec. 30).

Entry jobs are but a stepping stone, not a final destination. Minimum wage increases hinder this training and increase the cost of basic services. Just step into your local McDonald’s or Carl’s Jr. and compare prices of meals since the last increase in the minimum wage.

Isn’t it amazing that Molly closes with examples of who she believes are the real heroes: two opportunistic politicians and a publicity attention-seeker? Not one conservative made the list. Surprise, surprise.

Antone Ornellas

Post Falls

We’re better off today

In his disgusting diatribe against public schools, Cal Thomas lets us know that “a strong case can be made that things are much worse” now compared to “our grandparents’ generation” (“Intelligent design ruling clears air,” Dec. 27).

Such a case cannot be made for several reasons. The first one is the fact that we have not a generally agreed on set of criteria that would enable us to say which “things” to look at and how to count the points.

Secondly, the overall balance does not look very good for “our grandparents’ generation.” Yes, Bibles were in schools and so was prayer but outside those God-fearing segregated schools there were also lynchings and rampant discrimination. Women had minimal reproductive rights and some generation back not even the right to vote. Gays were routinely persecuted just for being what they were.

The Bibles, prayers and creationism did nothing for the suppressed minorities. Be it not for their heroic fight we would still have segregation and much more official discrimination in our “Christian nation.”

Peter C. Dolina

Veradale

Origin of life speculative

The arguments for evolution and intelligent design both have the same flaw. Their proponents assume that life originated on planet Earth. Since life’s origins are still a mystery, both theories fall into the realm of speculation.

What if the universe is larger and older than we supposed? What if it is infinite in both respects? What if the seeds of life are abundant, have great variety and are widely dispersed throughout this infinite universe?

If our current models of the universe are wrong, it could mean that Earth is merely a sanctuary (perhaps one of many) where living things take root and do what living things can do.

Scientists are discovering what living things can do through a process of endless inquiry, which results in the accumulation of new knowledge.

In contrast to this, religionists tend to limit inquiry by insisting that all knowledge was revealed to their ancient predecessors and is now enshrined in scriptural texts and/or cultural traditions.

It seems to me that a far better use for our energies would be to stop beating each other to death with baseless speculations and start devoting ourselves to making our sanctuary more habitable for all living things.

Thomas R. Macy

Post Falls

Keep biology, religion separate

Much has been made of the introduction of the theory of intelligent design (ID) into biology classes. Many claim this is merely religion thinly veiled as science.

They have it backwards. It is evolutionists who have stretched Darwin’s theory beyond recognition in their attempt to replace God with science.

Even presuming belief in his theory, Darwin never claimed to have discovered the source of life. Ignored in the current excitement over Darwin versus ID is the fact that there is no credible evolutionary theory for how life evolved from non-life.

Biologists used to claim that hundreds of amino acids might have randomly become arranged into chains forming the hundreds of molecules in the correct order to further form the simplest known living organism. After further research, scientists have compared this possibility to that of a tornado ripping through a junkyard and “accidentally assembling a fully functional Boeing 747.”

Why then must biology ignore alternate theories? Either science should stay out of the faith-based, origin-of-life business or ID proponents should get a seat at the biology debate table. But no, you insist, we must keep religion away from biology.

Fine then, I insist, just keep biology away from religion.

Matthew Albrecht

Spokane

Debt is the enemy within

In 1951, during Mr. Harry Truman’s presidency, the U.S. national debt was a mere $255 billion. Thirty years later, at the end of Mr. Jimmy Carter’s presidency, it was $930 billion. A moderate increase.

Now comes Mr. Ronald Reagan, giving the green light to red light spending. Yearly increases of four to five times as much as under Carter and Gerald Ford and 10 times as much as presidents before them.

Next, George Bush senior was worse, following eight years of Clinton, who cut the annual increase down to a third but also did not run a balanced budget.

With George W. Bush’s insane, immoral, disgusting administration, the debt reached $8.177 trillion.

On Oct. 1, the beginning of fiscal year 2006, he doubled the daily debt increase to $2.8 billion. By 2007 the debt will be at $9 trillion.

The average citizen has no understanding of the enormity of this sum, I suspect, and neither does Mr. Bush. This amount can never be reduced or paid off. Hyperinflation or monetary collapse may occur.

Bin Laden does not have to plan another 9/11 here. He is getting what he wants: We are destroying our great country from within without his help.

Vern Krockmeyer

Post Falls

Liberal papers hurt presidency

Once again The Spokesman-Review is showing off your liberal hypocrisy in your “Our View” opinion Dec. 21 (“Checks, balances there for a reason”).

Not one word that Carter and Clinton used the same tactic to spy on enemies of the U.S. Not one word of the hundreds of FBI files that were found in the basement of Clinton’s White House. Not one word of the Bennett investigation into Clinton’s use of the IRS to attack their perceived enemies or of the Democrats in the U.S. Senate who are trying to quash that report. Believe me, brother, if that report goes public, Hillary will do a full gainer into an empty pool.

I very much believe that the president was being very sincere when he said that he was trying to protect the American people. He is trying to prevent another 9/11 that the Clintons brought us. The next one can be laid at the feet of liberal newspapers such as yours: the New York Times, the L.A. Times and others.

It is my belief that you do not give a whit about the civil liberties of anybody, read Jim West, but are trying to bring down the president.

Henry Sego

Post Falls

Bush not first to spy

Mainstream media seem to be alluding that President Bush is acting illegally when authorizing domestic wiretaps. Was President Bush the first president to use warrantless searches?

In 1978, Jimmy Carter asserted the authority of the president to conduct warrantless searches in the interest of national security when men were thought to be spying for Vietnam.

In 1993, President Clinton used warrantless searches in the investigation of CIA official Aldrich H. Ames, who ultimately pleaded guilty to spying for the former Soviet Union.

In 1994, Clinton, in promoting a crime-fighting bill, expanded the use of warrantless searches to highly violent public housing projects. These were entirely domestic situations with no foreign intelligence value.

Also, in 1994, Clinton’s Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick said in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “The Department of Justice believes – and the case law supports – that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes and that the president may, as he has done, delegate this authority to the attorney general.” She added that same authority pertains to electronic surveillance such as wiretaps.

So, did he act illegally?

Dennis Wuerth

Malo, Wash.

Editor’s note: Presidents Carter and Clinton both signed orders allowing warrantless wiretaps in national security cases. In both cases, the orders included prohibitions against using such methods against U.S. citizens.

Can’t lead with fear

The fear-mongering going on is not convincing me that I need to give up the rights and liberties guaranteed me by our Founding Fathers. There needs to be more oversight and controls on the usurping of our freedoms. There have always been things to be scared of in the world and I find Bush’s fears too nebulous to surrender to.

Barbara Prete

Chattaroy

Thankful infant survivor is OK

Thanks, Spokesman-Review, for the follow-up article about Lyssa Saunders, the baby girl who survived a car accident caused by a drunken driver that killed her father, mother and sister in July (“Little girl recovers in grandfather’s care,” Dec. 27).

My daughter was friends with Lyssa’s father, Bart Bartron. She didn’t know Tabitha, Kjestine or Lyssa but the feeling of sadness and loss was overwhelming, not only for her friend Bart but for his young family that she will never get to know.

It’s heartwarming to know that this beautiful little angel is doing well and overcoming obstacles after such a senseless tragedy that took her family.

For the Saunders and Bartron families, I am so sorry for your loss but so thankful you have Lyssa.

Linda Weilep

Spokane

Just quit smoking

If this law had been passed a year ago, I, too, would have been up in arms over another one of my rights to self-pollute being taken to an extreme.

This year it doesn’t make a bit of difference. On Dec. 12, 2004, I decided I had enough of the nasty, stinking, expensive habit and I quit. After years of failed attempts to quit I found the key: You have to want to quit.

I’m no longer chained to where to buy my next pack. Do I have a lighter that works? Do I have enough money to buy them until payday? And where can I smoke them?

In the last 12 months since I’ve quit, my husband quit and my neighbor quit. In the last 12 months, my husband and I have not smoked over 1,000 packs and saved ourselves about $4,000. We feel better, we smell better and some stupid smoking ban is of no consequence to us, as we don’t smoke anymore!

If you want to self-pollute, go for it, but follow the law. We worked too hard to no longer expose ourselves to those carcinogens.

Shelley Anderson

Spokane

Give back public land

Our soldiers returned home from Iraq to find the roads into their favorite camping and fishing holes on Dworshak Reservoir closed to them by the same Army that they represented so valiantly over this past year.

Our United States government has sent our sons and daughters into the Middle East to free their citizens from the tyranny of dictators. They have fought on foreign soil to try and create a democratic society.

Our returning soldiers and their families have found that they are no longer welcome on land that is owned by the people. Behind the scenes, federal bureaucrats have written federal regulations that dictate how the land is to be used. There are groups intent on eliminating all recreation on federal land. If these anti-recreation extremists are successful, our grandkids may never know what it is like to go camping on dirt, catch a fish, or roast a hot dog over a campfire.

Our government needs to immediately reopen to the public the roads for access on the general access recreation land around Dworshak Reservoir.

David Galantuomini

Lewiston

Clark offers a tasty column

Doug Clark has, once again, smoked out controversy. Those demanding his head on a platter are thinner-skinned than a chicken breast served by Jenny Craig.

The individuals offended by Clark’s column can only find the almond in an Almond Joy. They most likely have lactose intolerance to a Good Humor Bar. Try spitting out the sour gummies and enjoy a good Snicker.

Jim Glenn

Spokane