Tag: 上海夜网XH

Focus on real problem behind all the violence

first_imgRe Oct. 17 letter, “Keep assault weapons only for police, military”: Please define your definition of an “assault-style weapon”? Do you mean any item that can be used to assault and inflict rapid and numerous wounds and/or death? If so, it must apply to cars, trucks, planes, knives, swords, hammers, screwdrivers, any firearms, bottles, pipe and any item a deranged individual would use to inflict pain, injury and even death to another person or animal.What is wrong today is that people have changed. Why do certain people feel that the solution to their problem is to inflict pain and worse on innocent people? Is it drugs? An overwhelming fear of failure? The problem is not the object used to inflict pain and death — it’s people. Categories: Letters to the Editor, Opinion Over the years, I have observed that the prevailing attitude of prohibiting this and that and passing more laws isn’t working. It’s always easy to prohibit “something.” Does it really solve anything, other than saying we did “something?” It didn’t work for booze, gambling and prostitution, etc.I agree with your comment, “but our forefathers could not have envisioned the reality of today. It is not 1776.” Our forefathers fought to free themselves from the abuses of an oppressive government. I wonder how they would react to today’s governmental involvement in our daily lives?The people of today are nowhere to same people of 1776. Recent events have certainly demonstrated that fact. Some people are less caring of their fellow man, have an attitude of, “What can I get out of this for me,” and have just “gone off their rocker.”Let’s agree to really put forth an effort to address the real problem. Let’s address what is affecting people. Mental illness? Drugs? I do know one thing for sure. It’s not the assault-style weapons you referenced in your letter.Joe VivaBallston LakeMore from The Daily Gazette:Foss: Should main downtown branch of the Schenectady County Public Library reopen?Schenectady, Saratoga casinos say reopening has gone well; revenue down 30%EDITORIAL: Thruway tax unfair to working motoristsEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homesEDITORIAL: Beware of voter intimidationlast_img read more

Read More

The IPO Commission rejects two of three complaints made by Lennox Linton against Prime Minister Skerrit.

first_imgLocalNews The IPO Commission rejects two of three complaints made by Lennox Linton against Prime Minister Skerrit. by: – July 19, 2011 130 Views   no discussions Share Share Sharing is caring!center_img Mr. Lennox LintonThe Integrity in Public Office Commission (IPO) in a report dated July 1st, 2011 has rejected two of the three complaints made by Mr. Lennox Linton concerning allegations of breach of the Code of Conduct by Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit.Mr. Linton made his complaints to the Commission via a letter dated November 5th, 2010 and addressed to the Chairman, Mr. Julian Johnson. A request was made for the evidence referred to Mr. Linton’s complaint to be forwarded to the Commission. Having examined and discussed the evidence, as well as hearing from the complainant in an oral session on 16th July, 2011, the Commission decided to launch an investigation “to ascertain whether Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit has committed a breach of the provision of Rule 1(e) of the Code of Conduct and an inquiry shall be held into this matter.”The complaints which were made by Mr. Linton are as follows;A) (i) “[the] Prime Minister is in breach of section 47(1) of that Act [Integrity In Public Office Act 2003] by virtue of his possession of unaccounted property, namely eight Ocean Front villas at Guillette, Savanne Paille, with an estimated market value of over 8 million EC dollars which cannot be explained by his legal income,” (letter -page 2);(ii) “in order to finance his ownership interest in these villas which he could not afford on his legal income, the Prime Minister accepted ‘gifts, benefits or advantages’ in contravention of item (c) of the Code of Conduct. The source of these gifts, benefits or advantages is clearly a matter for the Integrity Commission to investigate pursuant to the specific responsibility conferred by section 47(2) of the Act” (letter – page 2);(iii) “on account of his chairmanship of the Cabinet Meeting on October 9th, 2007 which granted a full suite of concessions to Blaircourt Property Development Limited for the construction of the villas at Guillette, the Prime Minister breached item (e) of the Code of Conduct by using his official influence to secure concessions for a business venture in which he had an ownership interest” (letter – page 2) andAccording to the Report which was signed by the Chairman Mr. Julian Johnson and three other members of the Commission,(i) “The complaint concerning section 47(L) of the Act is rejected since it is outwith the Code of Conduct and not within the Commission’s jurisdiction for the reason that section 47(I) is an offence-creating provision that can only be dealt with by the court. It is only where the Director of Public Prosecutions has instituted and successfully undertaken criminal proceedings against a person in public life that he can be said to have been “found to be in possession of property or pecuniary resources” contrary to the section…..”;(ii) “The complaint concerning Rule 1[c) of the Code of Conduct cannot be proceeded with because it is unparticularized, and not supported by the content of the “Evidence Bundle”;(iii) The Commission was of the view that further investigation was required regarding the complaint relating to Blaircourt Property Development.Ms. Helen Ambo, secretary of the Integrity Commission confirmed to Dominica Vibes News that a decision has been arrived at regarding the complaints made by Mr. Linton some time ago.Dominica Vibes News Tweet Sharelast_img read more

Read More