The failure to ban plastic bags; the scandal in Bell; life without parole for juvenile offenders

It was in the bag

Re “Pay reforms inspired by Bell OKd, but lawmakers defeat a proposed ban on plastic grocery bags,” Sept. 1

Though I was never too keen on the ban of plastic grocery bags, because I would have had to buy plastic bags for garbage anyway, I am appalled at the blatant lobbying and political donations that eventually struck down the bill in the final moments of the 2010 legislative session.

It is evident that any “green” or innovative energy ideas also will be lobbied out of existence.

For years I have been writing to legislators urging a crackdown on Ponzi-scheme operators. I’ve had no success, even though they cost Californians hundreds of millions of dollars. Now I know where I went wrong. I didn’t make donations to reelection campaigns.

Kurt Sipolski

Palm DesertT

he plastic bag issue is about waste — excessive waste. We have and use more bags than we need and more than the environment can sustain.

If the plastic bag manufacturers want to continue to make the bags, they should also recycle them.

A good way to do this: Pay people to recycle them, the same way we do with aluminum cans and plastic bottles. This will keep people employed, keep the bags out of the environment and educate the public. It should have been done years ago.

Susan Baker

Los Angeles

I am a retired person, and I have been environmentally aware for 60 years. I carefully sort my recyclables and the green stuff for my green can.

However, I reuse every plastic bag I receive. I use these bags for my garbage and refuse so I do not have to buy new plastic bags.

I depend on these bags and, if I lose them, I will need to shell out dollars I save for other necessities.

Jeanne Allen

Pacific Palisades

Everyone pretty much knows what the city of Bell has done, but I have a question.

The chief of police for Glendale, Randy Adams, retired with a full pension. Then he was hired by Bell as chief of police, doubling his salary to $457,000 while still eligible for his hundreds of thousands in pension.

Doesn’t the word retire mean that you stop working? How could he retire from one city with a big pension and then be hired by another city at such a huge salary? This is wrong.

Virginia Noyes

Glendale

Re: “Rizzo loaned Bell’s money to firms,” Sept. 1

The Times continues to pursue the misdeeds of the officials of the city of Bell, the latest outrage being the granting of loans without public discussion and formal proceedings.

The Times has exposed all that has happened to this poor city and its unsuspecting residents, and I say this just shows the value of the print media in our society.

That being said, when can we expect L.A. County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley and state Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown to do what they certainly must do: try those responsible for this ugly mess?

Bob McLaughlin

San Simeon

Is there no end to the corruption and greed in this kingdom? Was City Manager Robert Rizzo’s title actually “City Mismanager?”

If there’s any justice, after all this is settled, I think he deserves no compensation; he’ll deserve nothing more than a bill for the damage he has caused.

Ron Diton

Upland

Prison and teenagers

Re “Behind bars, without hope,” Editorial, Sept. 1

I would very much like to agree with your conclusion that the Fair Sentencing for Youth Act deserved to be passed by the Legislature. However, your editorial lists only two purposes for incarceration: It “punishes the criminal and protects the public.”

There is no mention of rehabilitation of the prisoner as a third purpose. Without a program of rehabilitation, is there any hope that a person who grew up in and lived in prison for 25 years can return to society successfully?

California needs an effective program of rehabilitation for prisoners, especially young ones.

W. Michael Johnson

San Marino

Thank you for your editorial bemoaning the defeat of this bill. Fear was allowed to trump reason, compassion and economic good sense.

Most of us have done things as adults that the passage of time later showed to be wrong or ill-advised. Isn’t that even more true for teenagers?

And yet we sentence teenagers to life without the possibility of parole for participating in something that a few more years of maturation might have dissuaded them from doing.

Were we in those teenagers’ shoes, having lived their life at home and in the streets up until the moment of the crime, are we so certain that we would have acted differently? Perhaps justice will only become part of our criminal system when we’re able to see “others” as ourselves.

Curtis Raynor

Santa Monica

I am the mother of police officer Larry Lasater, who was ambushed and shot April 23, 2005, during a foot pursuit of two armed robbers who had robbed a grocery store and a bank.

Seven juvenile lifers have been sentenced for murdering police officers.

The legislators who opposed this bill are not cowards as you labeled them. This bill revictimized victims and would have forced us to relive the murders of our family members through multiple hearings. The current law offers enough protection.

I regret you are so dismissive of victims; I hope you never have to become a member of a group such as Parents of Murdered Children or Concerns of Police Survivors.

Phyllis Loya

Antioch, Calif.

Thank you for your editorial favoring humane concern for youthful offenders facing life in prison. A nation that fails to nurture and care for its youth is not only morally repugnant; it faces a dismal future when those youth come to maturity.

Cynthia Cuza

Pacific Palisades

As The Times editorial pointed out, locking up a 17-year-old for life without any chance of parole makes no sense from either a public safety or humanitarian perspective.

The bill was supported by the peace officers association that represents the prison guards who work daily with these prisoners. This makes the lack of courage by so many legislators even more appalling.

Elizabeth Ralston

Los Angeles

The McCourts in court

Re “McCourts now bring legal heat,” Aug. 31

Keep the trial coverage coming; it’s certainly the big water cooler topic. Too bad there isn’t pay per view for this one. Vinnie would have been awesome doing the play by play.

Truthfully, it is sad for the children to have these private matters played out in public.

This decision will probably become a cornerstone of family law in California, and most certainly it will affect how Major League Baseball structures the ownership of teams.

Doug Warner

Beverly Hills

Thousands of our young men and women have died and more will die in Iraq and Afghanistan. The homeless in our nation number in the millions; children are hungry and lacking a decent education.

And The Times follows the sordid story of wealth and greed being played out in court, regaling us with the McCourts’ divorce dirty linen.

Why don’t these people settle their strife in private and use the millions they will end up paying their attorneys to help the homeless and feed the hungry?

Ruth Moos

Laguna Woods