Family offended by homeless editorial

My family and I were offended by your editorial concerning the homeless who had camped out at Interstate 40 and N.C. 86 ("Officer, remove that trash," July 29).

You indicated that a citizen sent a letter to Gov. Mike Easley, and you claimed that they considered the people camping there to be litter and ridiculed those who complained about the "camp" as having their sensibilities abused. You mention "feet dragging" on the part of the government when anyone tries to improve the lot of the homeless. How was the condition of these people being improved by living and begging near a highway exit?

You also referred to quick action on the part of the police as though they were storm troopers and put words in an officer's mouth that "the homeless don't count."

We are not "horrified parties," as you referred to us. Neither are we arch-conservatives who callously disregard the less fortunate in our community. Most people in the residential areas nearest to the camp donate money and food to reputable charities and organizations, and pay taxes that support shelters for the needy.

Your rambling editorial, which sarcastically called for setting up a shelter on I-40 and N.C. 86, missed the point completely. These people had no plumbing, no bathroom facilities and no protection from the elements. We have seen them urinating in public, drinking beer, and leaving garbage strewn all over the area. They have started fires to cook their food. Although there is no proof of culpability, it is not an unreasonable inference to connect these homeless with break-ins of cars and homes, which have escalated in residential areas within a mile of their camp.

Surely there are other ways to help alleviate the plight of the less-fortunate than giving them money directly. Giving to charities and church groups ensures that donations are used for the legitimate needs and not the wants of the homeless. -- Christine Farrin, Chapel Hill

Multiple shelters may be the answer

Perhaps the current debate as to the location of the new, homeless shelter for men should be re-phrased into the plural: "locations of new homeless shelters for men."

I find it anomalous to want to gather together under one roof all of these men. Such a congregation serves mainly to re-enforce a continuance of a lifestyle that the shelter is supposedly working hard to change. To be invited to come back to all your friends at the end of the day and swap tales of the day is abetting the very life style our whole community would like to see changed.

It is more efficient and economical to house all these men in one place. The offered help is centralized. Or is it? I want to suggest that spreading mini-shelters throughout the community may be better and less expensive than the "central-housing" model currently in consideration.

And here is where the plentiful religious organizations in our community can play such an important role. By each organization (church, synagogue, etc.) or group sponsoring two or four beds a night at a location they choose, the re-enforcing behaviors of this large group are significantly diminished.

As a resident of Millhouse Road, I have been brought to these observations by the current suggestion to locate the new homeless shelter out in the county on Millhouse Road. Such a location would certainly remove the problem of a centralized location from the confines of Chapel Hill. But out here? Plenty of forest out here to sleep in, I suppose, when the restrictions of the new shelter are too onerous for the homeless. Perhaps training could be provided to these men to secure an ample amount of referees, umpires and groundskeepers when the county develops the Blackwood Farm just purchased.

Another model may be better for our community. The time has come to examine mini-shelters as an alternative. -- Cornelius G. Kirschner, Chapel Hill

U.S. should nix Saudi arms deal

The Bush administration wants our federal government to allow a $20 billion weapons deal with Saudi Arabia and other non-democracies.

Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship. Its royal family is against democracy, equality, human rights and civil liberties. It doesn't support freedoms of speech, press and religion. Women only have what little rights their men will allow them to have. The Bible is illegal, and any citizen who converts to Christianity can be executed.

Don't forget that Osama bin Laden and most of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Some ''experts'' say that this advanced weapons deal will be a good counter to Iran. I wonder if these are the same experts who said that supporting Saddam Hussein would be a good counter to Iran. Look how that turned out.

Our country should support secular democracies, not theocratic dictatorships. -- Chuck Mann, Greensboro.

Panhandlers had a place to stay

Orange County officials recently responded to the rule of law and the will of the people by removing a group of panhandlers from the median of Airport Road and Interstate 40.

Over the past 12 months, the group grew from one to 12 persons, and the encampment took on the feel of a squatter's town -- with trash, sleeping bags and tarps occupying the small area north of Chapel Hill. A recent Chapel Hill News editorial voiced outrage at the actions of the Sheriff's Department and the community citizens who complained, citing a lack of compassion for the homeless and leaving the reader with the impression that there, in fact, was no place else for them to be.

The truth is that the Chapel Hill homeless shelter is in full operation and would have welcomed these folks with hot meals and clean beds. Instead, this group chose not to take advantage of our community hospitality and instead created an illegal and unsanitary camp on the outskirts of town.

The Chapel Hill News editorial suggests that our law enforcement officials overstated the number of homeless and treated these people with a lack of compassion and respect. This is unfair and unsubstantiated. Our officials were doing their job. The editorial fails to address the real issue of the situation on I-40; it is not our community's lack of compassion or our inability to provide the homeless with shelter -- it is ensuring that people who need help are aware of the good, legal and safe options available to them.

Don't blame this good community for wanting clean and sanitary open spaces, safer neighborhoods and better conditions for motorists and bikers. Just as the homeless need advocates, so do the people of Chapel Hill -- and I'm afraid on this account The Chapel Hill News fails us. -- Kevin Leibel, Chapel Hill.

Candidates ignore pressing problems

It's of small comfort to note that all of our presidential candidates, irrespective of party, have barely referred to our earth's major problems, which affect, without exception, all the globe's 193 nations and its 6.5 billion humans.

The United States, instead of acting with wisdom and leadership, has consistently acted fatuously by either denying, ignoring or blocking resolutions to mitigate further planetary disasters:

• Our federal government and leadership, which condones the emission of a massive amount of heat-trapping gases, refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol. Fortunately, over 300 mayors of U.S. cities and towns have agreed to equal or better the Kyoto Protocol targets.
• Our federal government is permitting Shell Oil to drill in the Arctic Circle's Beaufort Sea. A major oil spill appears inevitable that can never be cleared up. This calloused legislation would affect the chain of life by destroying whales, seafood, polar bears and create carnage amongst the Eskimos in that area.
• A nest of world-wide problems our candidates have bypassed include poverty (except for Edwards); population (although its rate of growth is decreasing, we're still on an inexorable track of 10 billion by 2050); stem-cell research with its potential for healthy lives; and world-wide water shortages with water tables dramatically falling everywhere including the United States' Ogallala Aquifer.

Despite our unfortunate, misguided incursion in Iraq, from which we shall hopefully sooner than later withdraw, planet earth has more pressing problems requiring significant discussion by the candidates.-- Winston L. Kirby, Chapel Hill.