MILITARY TIES

UH CAN ONLY GAIN FROM RESEARCH CENTER

The University of Hawai'i is deeply involved in the U.S. military enterprise. UH receives millions of dollars for military research and trains UH students to be soldiers for the military through ROTC. Rejecting the university-affiliated research center will not change the basic fact that UH is strongly invested in the U.S. military.

UH professors also already choose to do state, federal and corporate research with restrictions on publication. Rejecting the UARC will not serve to remove the voluntary restrictions on publication that already exist. The UARC will not introduce any involuntary restrictions.

Rejecting the UARC will cost Hawai'i millions of dollars that would flow into the state economy, paying faculty, students, staff and administrators, as well as provide funding directly to UH to pay for infrastructure.

Rejecting the UARC ignores the fact that UH already does all the supposedly bad things the UARC would bring to UH, and throws away money that will go to other states.

PRISONERS

SEND THEM TO BIG ISLE, REQUIRE SELF-SUFFICIENCY

I applaud the comments of Jack Telaneus of Hawai'i Kai regarding the prison overflow ("Isle penal colonies could be the answer," Oct. 14). I have for many years now mentioned this to our governor and many state senators, some who are now retired — about the possible solution to this problem.

It is very disheartening to read and hear on the news about the criminals who have 67 prior arrests with 27 convictions who are still on the loose. Our police are doing a wonderful job arresting these lowlifes; however, our judicial system and the ACLU have allowed these criminals to be free to continue to victimize our communities.

I agree with Telaneus that the one solution to this problem is to expand our prison in Kulani on the Big Island and let them be self-sufficient by farming their own vegetables, raising their own livestock and learning a trade — instead of only watching TV, lifting weights to get bigger to terrorize their victims and going to the well-supplied library (better than some of our schools) to learn how to beat the system.

I would also like to recommend that they hire our retired drill sergeants from the Army and Marines and I guarantee you that within three months they would have wished they were never incarcerated.

This, if approved, would help our Big Island community with much-needed jobs, lock up our professional criminals and save our state much-needed monies.

GAS CAP

WHEN WILL LEGISLATORS REALIZE THEY'RE WRONG?

How the Democrats can continue to claim the gas cap is working is beyond comprehension. It has continually driven gasoline prices up well above the national average since the day it was implemented. Gas prices remain high with no relief in sight.

When will the legislators understand that they were wrong and they need to repeal the law? Will only voting them out of office make them realize how poorly they have represented the people of Hawai'i?

MONARCHY

OVERTHROW CLEARLY STATED IN APOLOGY LAW

Bob Gould wrote in his Oct. 14 letter: "The U.S. did not overthrow the monarchy."

Perhaps he missed the first sentence of United States Public Law 103-150, 103d Congress Joint Resolution 19, Nov. 23, 1993:

"To acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the Jan. 17, 1893, overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i, and to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i."

Gould and others can read the entire law at www.hawaii-nation.org/publawall.html

CRIME STORIES

WHAT'S THE POINT HERE?

I need help in trying to figure out if your top headline on Oct. 18 is good news or bad. It reads, "HPD unable to solve 90% of felonies in '04."

Meanwhile, page B1 states "O'ahu crime still dropping." Bad news on A1, good news on B1. Can hardly wait for C1.

MICHELLE WIE

PLAYING BY THE RULES PARAMOUNT TO GAME

I do not understand all the fuss made by Wie supporters. No one accused her of cheating and it appears that she did not. However, she readily admitted that she committed a breach of golf rules; whether it was inadvertent or accidental is obviously irrelevant. She is right when she went on to say that she will abide by the rules. Of course, that is not only demanded, but that is the game of golf.

Golf is probably the only remaining sport for which integrity and playing by the rules are paramount. We know that players have called violations on themselves even when violations were not witnessed by anyone and they disqualified themselves. One individual, an admitted Wie supporter, stated that he saw no violation of rules — but he is not an official.

Basically, Wie supporters are unhappy with the individual(s) who brought the violations to the attention of appropriate tournament officials. No one is happy with Wie's misfortune, but we must play by and accept the rules and decisions of the tournament officials; Wie did. That is the only way to win and feel good about winning. Let's quit bellyaching and hope that Wie moves on for a better future.

REPORTER CAN'T JUSTIFY UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT

About the Sports Illustrated writer who is "strongly defending" what he did: My question is, "Do journalists have ethics?" If a journalist sees something happening, is he or she there just to report it or should he or she take action if he or she can prevent it?

Michael Bamberger supposedly saw what he believed was a rules violation. He supposedly knows the rules of golf. If so, he would have known that once Michelle Wie signed her scorecard on Saturday, she would be disqualified if there was a violation. Knowing the rules, it appears that he deliberately set up a situation where he knew the only result, if he were correct, would be disqualification.

Of course, this would create a story that he would be able to report on — how a 16-year-old girl didn't follow the rules of golf and was disqualified. The real focus of the story is how an adult, experienced journalist could be allowed to create a situation that he and his magazine can profit from. If that is the ethics of a journalist, then I'm glad I'm not one.

One final point: if the journalist saw what he or she thought was someone robbing a bank, would he or she wait until afterward and ask the robber, "Excuse me, did you just rob the bank?" Somehow, I don't think so. There is simply no way for him to justify his totally unacceptable conduct.

LOCAL FISHERMEN UNFAIRLY TARGETED IN PRESERVATION

Although we agree with the idea suggested in the recent Advertiser editorial calling for the registration of fishing nets as a measure to help curb the spread of marine debris, it needs clarification ("Users of fishing nets must be liable for costs," Oct. 13). The editorial implied that the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands net debris problem is caused by local fishermen, but research reveals that 100 percent of the net debris actually comes from foreign or out-of-state commercial vessels.

Coincidentally, in 1998 a group of 17 individuals, both nearshore fishermen and other nearshore resource stakeholders, convened for a series of advisory meetings to address this very subject. These "Gill Net Task Force" meetings were held with the assistance of the Hawai'i Department of Aquatic Resources (DAR) and some "closeted" environmental groups. This professional panel came up with a 12-point plan of suggested changes to the DAR rules and regulations.

These 12 groundbreaking gill-net regulations for the state of Hawai'i, one of which was net identification and registration, promised to virtually eliminate any illegal gill-net practices, as well as mitigate interaction with endangered species, while at the same time allowing responsible island nearshore netting customs and practices to continue.

Unfortunately, these recommendations were never addressed by DAR.

As fishermen, it is disheartening to be constantly and unfairly maligned as destructive enemies of ocean resources, which ultimately results in unwarranted fishing restrictions. Local fishermen supply the endless demand of island fish in the U.S. With health and restaurant trends calling for more fish, Hawai'i has been placed on the culinary map as a major supplier. The state Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism uses local fish as a major marketing tool.

Despite the economic benefits fishing brings to Hawai'i, Gov. Linda Lingle recently signed off on the largest historical fishing ban imposed in the Hawaiian Islands; federal legislation has been introduced to further restrict fishing areas; the state Legislature and DLNR are proposing changes to create marine protected areas that equate to "no-fishing areas"; and environmental groups have targeted the fishermen over pollution in their quests to protect the ocean.

Hawai'i's nearshore fishermen have made important contributions to marine management practices and in promoting sustainable fisheries in Hawai'i. As users, we are the guardians of ocean resources, but have unfortunately become entangled in the gill net of politics and resource allocation issues.

Hawai'i's nearshore fishermen are the community that brings you fresh Hawaiian fish.

STREET EVENTS

MAKE SAFETY OUR FIRST PRIORITY

In her Oct. 13 letter, Katharina Heyer ("Triathlon: Crash came on unsafe streets") touched upon an issue that many O'ahu residents have previously voiced concerns on: the safety of participants and the public when an event is held on our streets.

While the accident situations Heyer described are unfortunate, most event organizers do properly plan and budget for adequate safeguards to mitigate against accidents occurring. For the past 25 years I have been involved with organizing events that run the gamut from fewer than a hundred participants to tens of thousands. Each had its own challenges, but when properly resourced and budgeted to put into place the appropriate amount of safety measures the safety record has been remarkable.

Unfortunately, many events either do not have the financial resources to hire sufficient police and traffic safety devices or they choose not to do so.

It is interesting to observe that some events are allowed to proceed with what a reasonable person would consider clearly inadequate safety measures while another event, conducted on the same course, will appear to have more than adequate measures in place. Granted, a robust police presence may not guarantee an accident-free event, but it does reduce the risk of one happening.

When events are conducted on public streets it is incumbent upon event planners and those who permit events not to jeopardize participant and public safety because of either lack of money or reluctance to pay for adequate police and traffic safety devices.
A step in the right direction might be the publishing of clear and specific minimum safety requirements that an organizer must guarantee will be in place for the event. If those minimum requirements cannot be met a permit should not be issued.

Sufficient funding, however, is only part of the solution. Prior planning with the city and state agencies that permit events, as well as with the Honolulu Police Department, is critical. The larger or more complicated an event is will dictate how much planning is required.

We are fortunate to have exceptionally dedicated police officers, and although they are trained in traffic control, each event on public streets brings its own special set of circumstances that can only be addressed though adequate prior planning.

Heyer concluded her letter with the statement, "I no longer feel confident that we can invite the world's top athletes to come to Hawai'i and tell them that we can guarantee their safety."

Hopefully steps will be taken in the future to minimize the possibility of similar accidents. Hawai'i is a wonderful place to compete, the athletes love it and, based upon the economic impact generated by some events, it's good for our economy.

All those involved in staging events on public roadways must strive to provide the safest possible venue not only for the participants, but for the public at large.