Letters to the editor March 10

Smoking: Where are restaurant owners' rights?

This is in regards to Robin Christy's reply to my article about rescinding laws that forbid smoking in restaurants.

Robin, it's about freedom. It's about an owner of a restaurant having the inalienable right of liberty to choose whether or not he or she wishes to cater to smokers. The owners pay the bills and should have the right to choose the most lucrative path for their business.

You, on the other hand, already have the right to avoid any establishment. You are not forced to eat at restaurants that were lawfully forced to cater to your point of view. So where is the fairness?

Instead of going after a restaurant owner's rights to cater to smokers, people with your point of view should have instead asked your representatives to pass laws to require quality ventilation systems for all restaurants. That way, everybody gets what they want and need without all the animosity, bigotry and political rhetoric directed at restaurant owners and every American's right to smoke. And no, I do not smoke.

James R. Parker

Carson City

Unrealistic to expect Realtors to add jobs

Even though sales of existing homes in our area rose by 49 percent in January 2010 vs. January 2009, how can Realtors be expected to add additional employees to their staff?

I am sure that the 49 percent increase in home sales didn't occur because hard-working people decided to purchase a home. Job security just doesn't exist today. The few employers that are hiring, are hiring part-time workers.

If employers can't even afford the expense of paying employee benefits, how can Realtors be expected to hire additional personnel? Look at our own government. The U.S. can't even afford to hire employees to cope with the work overloads that exist at the FTC and Social Security.

David Schwartz

Reno

Washington doesn't help jobless Americans

Well, here we go again - the president and Congress are after you with the ill-written health bill, loss of unemployment benefits, cutting education benefits, and loss of jobs to protect the few who will have a job, a roof over their heads and food in the children's stomachs.

What next? We elect these officials to represent us, not their friends in Washington, D.C. These people were elected by we the people - for the people, not for a select few.

Our taxes have increased because of illegals and people out of work caused mainly by the NAFTA and CAFTA acts by Bill Clinton and George Bush, which were supposed to be repealed. Our jobs are overseas or out of country and they pay no taxes - all we get are jobs in the medical field or

McDonalds - minimum wage, no benefits, no future. The health bill will pass but with no fines or drops in benefits as it should have been done many years ago, and nothing for illegals.

They want to drop so many programs for unemployed workers. Where does it stop? Use the closed military bases for homeless and give them jobs to stay there. Remember elections come this year, so use your judgment and get it right this time.

John Choat

Dayton

Will helmet law go once health care bill passes?

Sue Morrow, regarding your commentary on Feb. 28, I'm assuming if the health care bill is passed into law and everyone is required to have health care insurance, you will support efforts to have the mandatory helmet law repealed.

Curtis (Smokey) Coman

Carson City

Microchip Americans? That's an outrage

In response to the letter by Dean Borges on Feb. 25. "Here's an idea: Let's microchip U.S. Citizens." Let's not. You might as well implant GPS tracking systems in people, install closed-circuit cameras in everyone's homes, cars and workplaces.

The tattoo idea is just as far off. Almost all tattoo shops in the United States could copy a tattoo and do a skin implant.

The change needs to come from the top, meaning the president and on down. That's our problem. Where did "land of the free" go?

Robert Shaw

Carson City

Chuck Muth must have holes in his head

Chuck Muth has to be the most narrow-minded person in the world. His sole proposal to raise revenue by having a "helmet-less license" is not only asinine but totally overstated.

I'm sure that several hundred people will be pay extra for this license, but to think that this will raise revenue for the state deficit is laughable. How long are we going to have to endure his mindless rants in the Nevada Appeal?

Gary Handley

Carson City