By Jim Schutze
By Rachel Watts
By Lauren Drewes Daniels
By Anna Merlan
By Lee Escobedo
You jerks: I am sickened and downright shocked that your editor in chief allowed an obviously mentally disturbed member of your writing staff to print what is nothing short of a slap in the face of Deep Ellum (Full Frontal, August 26). There are many businesses down here struggling to keep afloat so they can make a living and just survive. They buy your ads, so the least you can do is show some respect and some decency. It hurts all of us who work here OR call Deep Ellum our home. Why don't you ever publish anything positive--why don't you come down here and sit in on the next restaurant/club owner meeting? No one in Deep Ellum appreciates your sick humor. I will go a step further and say that I truly wish everyone in Deep Ellum who advertises with you would PULL their ads immediately. We have all tried so hard to take steps to make it safe down here for innocent people who want nothing more than to come down and enjoy themselves. You idiots at the Dallas Observer are screwing yourselves in a way. Think about the lost revenue your stupid spoof might cause.
If these bars and businesses close up because people stay away, then you will lose customers as well. I dare whoever did this to come forward and try to convince all of us that it's innocent fun. It's the talk of Deep Ellum, but not in the way you jerks have intended. No one down here thinks it's funny. Do the right thing. Apologize, and I mean immediately.
Arvel and Candace Jernigan
Owners, Club Indigo
Big thanks to Buzz: Well, that explains it!
Over the past three years, I've had at least seven to eight pieces of Bob Decherd/Belo Corp. garbage thrown in my front yard (Buzz, by Eric Celeste, August 12 and August 21). I didn't appreciate it at all, considering that I'd unsubscribed from The Dallas Morning News more than 10 years ago because of its lies and withholding of critical information. After about five occurrences of their garbage-throwing, I called the distributor, and I was told that she wouldn't do this anymore. But it kept happening.
While I'm not surprised that the Belo Corp. is guilty of fraud and lying about circulation practices, a big thanks goes to Buzz for reporting this and explaining how I ended up with all that garbage in my yard.
Vinny to the Rescue
In the mind of a doofus: Bravo to John Gonzalez for his story on Cowboys training camp! ("Old News," August 26.) The article may not have been completely informative, but it was funny, insightful and accessible even to non-Cowboys fans (if I can project myself into the mind of a doofus who's NOT a Cowboy fan). Thanks for the laughs, and go, Mayor Lopez.
Anything could happen: That was an excellent article about the Dallas Cowboys. Your style is down-to-earth and relaxing. You're right. We don't know what this season holds, but isn't it exciting to anticipate? Thanks for your objectivity and humor.
I Love My Mac-11
Sweet, innocent assault weapons: OK, stop being so paranoid. I have bought ALL my "assault weapons" after 1994, and they include many great weapons like a Mac-11, AK-47, Ar-15, pistol-gripped semi-automatic shotgun and a MARK 23 (a pistol with a threaded barrel). NONE of these guns has hurt anyone for as long as I owned them, and the law you talk about does not prevent them from being made. They are still legal to make with high-capacity clips readily available; this shows that the "assault weapon ban" is useless. Let it sunset; consider it would have never passed unless the sunset clause was built in. This was to basically say, "OK, fine, let's see who is right 10 years from now, and then we'll let it expire." The CDC and the DOJ have both done studies that show how these weapons are used in less than 2 percent of gun crimes and how the ban has not had any real effect on crime.
Most criminals want small guns that are easily concealed illegally and without getting legal permits; that's why they are criminals. Blame the person behind the trigger, not the gun.
Don't Speak for Taylor
Arrogant and ignorant: In his response to the Taylor Hooton article ("All the Rage," by Paul Kix, August 12), Matt Garver writes, "...in my heart, I think if Taylor could still say anything, he would not blame anyone but himself" (Letters, August 26).
Only arrogance, youthful ignorance or both would compel anyone to presume to speak for a dead child who, having his whole life ahead of him, decides in one tragic moment that ending it is his best possible option. By the way, to suggest that a young man suffering from such a fatal lack of judgment would in any way agree with your point of view doesn't exactly strengthen your argument, sir.
How dare you presume to speak for him? You think that just because you coached him one summer that suddenly you can act as his representative?
While the Hootons do bear the brunt of the responsibility, a fact they will have to live with forever, they didn't raise this kid in a vacuum. Unless Mom and Dad were "juicing" at home, Taylor must've come in contact with a culture that said it was OK to use steroids. And if you and the other coaches of the school are so disconnected that your collective opinion vastly differs from the collective opinion of the student body, maybe you guys need a line of work that doesn't demand such a price for indifference.
Reuben L. Owens