TODAY'S PAPER
59° Good Afternoon
59° Good Afternoon
OpinionLetters

LETTERS: Immigrants, LIRR and more

Compassionate voice

a welcome change

What a breath of fresh air from Frances Cerra Whittelsey ["Treat the homeless with compassion," Opinion, Jan. 8] during this extremely politically polarized era, characterized by civility on the back burner, replaced by in-your-face brashness.

I am sure Whittelsey's compassion speaks for the majority of Long Islanders, regardless of political orientation or positions on immigration reform.

Fred Barnett

Lake GroveMigrants' 'audacity'

sparks outrage

I am absolutely outraged regarding the recent situation in the woods of Huntington Station ["Migrants' tent village is razed," News, Jan. 12]. This is private property, and it was against the law for the illegal immigrants to set up their tent homes.

However, the laws of this country mean nothing to people who have scoffed at them initially to enter this country illegally. The audacity of these men, who well know the weather conditions and economic situation this country is in, is jaw-dropping. Why is it that when they are told of the laws they are breaking, they say they will see who will outlast their stay there, the authorities or them?

What are taxpayers expected to do, incur more taxes to house and pay for persons entering illegally? When is enough enough?

Terry Sherwood

FarmingvilleLIRR practice looks like 'Madoff math'

I, like many of my fellow commuters, was surprised to read that the LIRR broke its on-time record. While I agree with the letter writer ["That's not our LIRR," Letters, Jan. 9] that these numbers are certainly unaudited, there was one interesting observation that I felt was missing. All too often when a problem occurs - especially during the evening rush hour - a number of trains wind up being canceled, to be replaced with "new" trains that for the life of me I could never find on any schedule anywhere. This is nothing more than a variant of "Madoff math" in an attempt to cook their numbers.

Rich Corriss

FarmingdaleChild or no child,

DWI should be felony

Having read that a man was indicted under the new Leandra's Law that aims to crack down on drunken drivers with children in their vehicles ["Indicted on felony DWI," News, Jan. 7], I agree that the felony charge is very justified. However, as I read in the paper almost daily, drunken driving is widespread, and I wonder why all drunken drivers shouldn't face a felony charge and mandatory jail sentence, whether there is a child in the car or not? Drunken drivers are a threat to us all.

M.S. Feinstein

Merrick

Comments

We're revamping our Comments section. Learn more and share your input.

Columns