Your Views for December 23


Ethics clarification

I am writing in response to the article published Thursday, Nov. 29, titled “Vendor goes before ethics panel,” by Colin M. Stewart.

The following statement was made in the article: “Boyd is accused of a conflict of interest by authorizing payments from the school to companies owned by himself and his wife, Erika Boyd. About six years ago, their companies — Boyd Enterprises, Tropical Dreams, Tropical Dreams Ice Cream, and Just Fabulouso — began providing the school with thousands of dollars worth of supplies and food.”

I am not writing this to offer an opinion on the ethics investigation, merely to set the record straight in regard to Mr. Boyd’s involvement with Tropical Dreams Ice Cream.

While Mr. Boyd at one time was licensed to use the names Tropical Dreams and Tropical Dreams Ice Cream in order to sell products of that name out of his retail location, commonly known as the Kress Building in Hilo. That license expired in 2009 and was not renewed.

John and Nancy Edney are the sole owners of Tropical Dreams Ice Cream and have been since 2001. Mr. Boyd has had no association with Tropical Dreams Ice Cream or its subsidiaries since that time.

I appreciate your cooperation in publishing this clarification.

John R. Edney

President, Edney & Sellers Ltd.

Arm the teachers

In air defense, one can employ multiple tiers — short range, medium range, and long range. Medium- and long-range missiles are guided by radar and therefore engage the targets head on. However, the defense is somewhat porous because it’s harder to hit the targets.

Short-range missiles are sometimes called “revenge” weapons because there is little time to acquire, track and engage fast-moving close-in targets, and so the missiles are guided by infrared radiation from the enemy planes’ tailpipes. Therefore, unless you deploy the missiles in a ring, they engage the plane only after it has done its dirty work.

What good is that, you say? Like coral snakes versus rattlesnakes, short-range missiles are more numerous, more maneuverable and less likely to miss. The enemy may think twice about braving their fangs. Plus, a hedgehog defense will quickly attrite the offense.

What’ll you have, pardner? Pour me a Stinger, please.

What does all this have to do with protecting students from crazy people? Think of gun control as a Patriot missile system. It’s a large-scale, expensive, relatively long-range answer to gun violence in school rooms. It meets the problem head on, but it’s cumbersome and porous. Prohibition didn’t stop drunks from boozing, and so-called gun control will not stop crazies from getting guns.

True, an armed teacher or principal won’t completely stop the killing, since they would act in a “revenge” mode, after the bad guy had opened fire. But they could limit the damage, and the fact they are armed might give the killer pause. Slipping past a viper fence is one thing, but even loonies may think twice about invading a nest of coral snakes.

I used to do some subbing, and I know that teachers come in various types. Some that I’ve known would probably acquit themselves well with a gun, others are not Dirty Harry oriented. This situation should resolve itself; those who would voluntarily qualify for a concealed-carry permit would likely be effective.

Maybe they’d fail in a point-blank shootout with a lunatic, but then they probably would have died anyway. At least they and their students, even those in a nearby classroom, would have a chance.

What about unstable teachers, you ask? The same could be said about cops. Should we make them go unarmed? England tried that. Didn’t work.

There is something for everyone here. Arming willing teachers and administrators would be relatively cheap or perhaps even no-cost if they provided their own weapons, those who believe wishes are kisses would be still free to pursue gun control, and the students would immediately be safer.

So, what’ll you have, teacher? Gimme a Glock, please. Hold the olive.

Click. Bang. Dead.

Bob Stimson

Hilo

Tireless supporter

Sen. Daniel Inouye was a longtime advocate and supporter of the U.S. Forest Service’s research efforts in Hawaii and the Pacific Islands. He was instrumental in the establishment of the Pacific Southwest Research Station’s Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry and the Hawaii Experimental Tropical Forest on the Island of Hawaii.

Sen. Inouye’s legacy will ensure the enduring and dynamic range of research activities throughout the region for generations to come. His leadership, innovation and dedication are greatly appreciated and will be dearly missed.

We look forward to continuing our innovative research and ongoing efforts to conserve, restore and sustain the natural resources of the Hawaiian and Pacific Islands.

Alexander L. Friend

Station director,

USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station

 

Rules for posting comments