Letters: Tax breaks for surveillance cams

WITH SO many surveillance cameras in Philadelphia, near private residences and businesses with high crime rates, wouldn't it be great if the city could offer residents and business owners tax breaks if they have these cameras, and also offer a special cash incentive for anyone who captures a crime on their camera in which a suspect is arrested and convicted?

This would be a win-win situation for residents, businesses, communities and the city in general, plus it would make our city much safer because there would be more cameras available. I've noticed that a lot of the recent crimes have been solved with the help of surveillance video cameras in this city and, unlike witnesses, a surveillance camera can't be intimidated.

Carlton R. Manley

Philadelphia

All vet

Re: Jad Sleiman's story, "Group wants vets to serve themselves at City Hall agency":

Who better to understand a veteran's problems than a veteran? A civilian can not put themselves into the "boots" of a veteran. They need professionals to assist them in getting help in every aspect that concerns them. I've been there where I was disrespected when asking for help by a civilian because I asked if they were veterans. Their reply was, "What difference does that make?" This was in a government building!

Veteran Art Merretazon was perfectly right in making that request in the article.

Paul D. Kelly, Sr.

Philadelphia

"Jackass" end times

The fact that the No. 1-grossing movie this week was "Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa" demonstrates that the days of civilization as we have known it may be numbered.

This coarse, crude, dopey "entertainment" illustrates that the American people are increasingly defined by an appeal to the lowest common denominator, and that we have too much time available to us.

I visit a movie theater once every few years, on average. I am not missing anything.

Oren M. Spiegler

Upper Saint Clair, Pa.

The marrying kind

To Stu Bykofsky: The definition of marriage has most certainly not been "unchanged" for 2,000 years. Until 1967 it was perfectly legal for interracial marriage to be outlawed in certain states. So if you are OK with banning gay people from marrying, are you OK with the good people of Mississippi defining marriage as the union of one white man and one white woman? Or Oklahoma defining marriage as the union of one Christian man to one Christian woman? Or how about any state defining marriage that excludes you?

Like it or not, the federal government bestows married couples with rights that single people or people entered into civil unions do not receive.

I don't doubt that conservatives believe in equal rights; the problem is that they believe in equal rights only for themselves.

Jonathan Esten

Philadelphia

Undoing the done

Good for Gov. Corbett for considering not having any testing of people to get food stamps. I believe this is part of his long term re-election plan. He will slowly reinstate over the next 10 months all the cuts he has made so he can tout what a great job he's done. If he gets re-elected you can expect all these cuts to happen again. Maybe I'm a cynic but I don't believe that people magically change their views without reason. It's not because he's a good guy. He's not!

Joe Orenstein

Philadelphia