Subway stations less safe than most factories
We have all seen the photo of the gentleman who got pushed onto the subway tracks in New York, where he was hit and killed. This death has made me think and wonder why, but let’s add this thought.
In any factory OSHA requires railings or protective barriers be installed so people cannot be put into a danger area. This summer the hard workers in Fort Wayne got in trouble for just having their feet dangling over the edge of a barrier while they ate their lunch and watched a ballgame. So my question is why a subway station is not required to have an automated barrier to keep people from falling into the track area or even falling on the third rail, which is electrified and will kill a person on contact. Why is this open area even allowed?
If this death had happened in a factory or work site, millions of dollars in fines would have been handed down for no safe barriers in place. How many people have to get killed before something is done to change this and make it safer for all? I made up my mind to not sit back any longer and watch another news broadcast of a death like this. Hope this letter gets someone thinking how to make this world safer and react.
SAMUEL A. BAKER Decatur
Creation bill contrary to region’s heritage
I grew up in Fort Wayne during the 1930s, ’40s and early ’50s. In those days, one could make a serious argument that the city was the equivalent of today’s Silicon Valley, with inventions such as television and the hand-held calculator, just to name a few.
Study of science in schools in the surrounding area was at a high level then; but I see that is now under attack, with Sen. Dennis Kruse’s bills in the Indiana Senate promoting the teaching of creationism in our schools. Isn’t this identifying with a culture more in tune with the Middle Ages than the 21st century?
In any case, it is a sad commentary on a region that once was in the forefront of scientific research in our country.
G. STANLEY COLLYER Louisville, Ky.
Abstention appropriate only for conflicts
This letter is in reference to the Dec. 2 article relating to vote abstentions by members of the Common Council of the City of Fort Wayne.
We were appalled! Abstentions for any reason other than a conflict of interest constitute a dereliction of duty.
Members of the City Council are elected by their constituents to represent them. That representation assumes that the elected representative will cast a vote on issues presented that he or she believes is consistent with the wishes, preferences or interests of that constituency. Failure to vote is a failure to perform the duties of the office.
If a member is opposed to the issue, a vote of no is appropriate; if a member is favorable to the issue, a vote of yes is appropriate. A member who abstains from any vote disrespects those whose interests he or she is by oath and law duty bound to represent; it is a failure to act; it is a rejection of the sworn commitment to represent.
Such abstentions may be common in higher legislative bodies, but at the level of city government should not be tolerated. And certainly 15 such should be grounds for recall of that representative based upon his failure to do his duty.
NED R. CARNALL, WILLIAM COLBY, WILLIAM SANDUL, TERRY FAIRFIELD, ROBERT DETTMER, JAY BUTLER, JAMES BLUM Fort Wayne