Courthouse stroller ban is bad idea, hurts parents

Courthouse stroller banis bad idea, hurts parents
EDITOR:
I am writing in response to the article dealing with the Mahoning County Courthouse's ban of baby strollers. First, I would like to say that this has greatly provoked me, and in my opinion, this was a deplorable decision on behalf of the courthouse.
If it is hard to detect, why not think of other ways to do security procedures when it comes to strollers? Some ways to change the security could be searching the strollers, getting better, more updated metal detectors, even if it comes to searching the adult as well as the stroller.
If this has never happened, why start this law now? Not to mention that no other county has this law. By making this law, they have done nothing but angered people and given people ideas. When discussing this law, they obviously did not think of the innocent people, the working parents who have children. If they were to get off work and needed to go to the courthouse, with their hands full of papers, how are they supposed to carry their children? Especially if they have more than one that is not yet able to walk. They can't leave them in their car: That is illegal too. What are parents supposed to do with their strollers? Chain them outside the courthouse like bicycles?
The courthouse should not have to worry abut the strollers rolling backward. That is the parent's responsibility. That's why they invented straps to hold the child in, and if the parent has a strong grasp on it, I don't see a problem. If anything, carrying your children and other things is more dangerous. If you were to drop something and bent down to pick it up, all of that weight could cause you to lose your balance and fall. There are many possibilities of injury that we could think of, but we aren't making laws against those things.
I think they should reconsider this law. They should think about the other people. If the courts think that banning strollers from the courthouse is going to keep weapons and contraband out, they are obviously oblivious to the deviant minds of those who intend on bringing such items in.
CHELSEA BOYCE
North Jackson
Killer of Youngstown copdeserves quick punishment
EDITOR:
Who will be punished for the senseless death of officer Michael Hartzell? The grand jury and the prosecutor wasted no time in indicting the coldblooded killer. The prosecutor said that he will seek the death penalty. Is this right or wrong?
If this killer is given the death penalty, it will take years and years to see it become reality. As with many others, there will be appeal after appeal. He will sit on death row and grow old.
Is justice being served? He sits in prison getting three squares a day, clean sheets on a regular basis, etc. The victim's family and those who were close to the officer must watch this disgusting process go on and on. The only ones who will benefit are the killer and the defense attorneys. This is justice? I don't think so.
Why do our laws allow for a killer to go through the appeals process? If there was a shadow of doubt, it would be understandable. This is an open-and-shut case of coldblooded murder.
Put him to death, and rid our society of another sub-human. The quicker the better. What we don't need is another killer living at our expense forever.
Please don't subject us to that rehabilitation theory. He is a coldblooded killer and will kill again in a heartbeat. He shows no remorse.
ROBERT J. THORNTON
Youngstown