That irritating beep saves workers' lives

Dennis Fitzgerald's complaint about backup beepers (Letters, Jan. 29) was loud and clear. But if you had a family member on that construction site you might welcome the safety aspects beepers provide. OSHA mandates the beepers for good reason: because countless lives have been saved from death or permanent physical impairment. Many beepers at one site only heighten the safety awareness. A safe construction site allows each worker to return home whole at pau hana.

Be aware your current residence was once a construction site with beepers, too. Treat the beepers like fireworks in Hawaii; you might disdain but they will remain. Think and act safety 24/7. You could wear earplugs at the appropriate time -- and remember to Live Aloha!

Include drug testing with public assistance

One safeguard that could be employed to protect children whose parents are on welfare is to conduct random drug tests on household members.

Having received welfare in a transitional time of my life when my children were very young, I deeply appreciate the boost it gave me to become a productive citizen. However, I am also aware that people use welfare to conduct their lives irresponsibly.

Military personnel are drug tested. And the state deems it appropriate to drug test teachers. If welfare recipients are drug free and making an effort to become financially secure, that is good. But should our welfare system tax money be given to people who use drugs?

Barriers would reduce falls from overpasses

H-1 was shut down Wednesday for an incredible third time in two weeks. For those hundreds affected, including me, I'm not quite sure why the item was buried on page A-4.

In any event, these shutdowns have all involved people falling from overpasses to the highway.

While not pretty, surely it is time to put up barriers, as they have in many cities, to reduce suicides and, in our second most recent case, infanticide.

Bush will veto 'pork' anyway to pay for war

I think we all agree with Mark Stephens (Star-Bulletin, Jan. 31) that our congressional delegation should cut back on the needless "pork" that is attached to so many budget bills.

But it appears now that George Bush is going to veto those funds, which would go to projects at home, so that he can use the money for his war in Iraq. Just think what could have been done to fix things in our own country if we had not spent more than a trillion dollars destroying and then rebuilding in a country that had nothing to do with the Saudi terrorist attack of 9/11 and that posed no threat to the United States.

I certainly don't defend all of the pork added to the budget by our elected officials, but better to put a billion dollars into America and American pockets than a trillion dollars into Iraq and those who are benefitting from killing innocent Iraqis.

The Congress should be killing Bush war funding requests, instead of the other way around. And changing the name from "pork" to "earmarks" didn't fool us, either.

Beach access is a matter of safety

Mahalo to all those involved in the collaborative effort to provide 911 signs at city property beach accesses. This is certainly a life-saving measure. However, I strongly urge the public and our elected officials to look at the bigger issue. That is, should we allow private individuals to close off accesses to our beaches, thereby denying EMS and fire crews the ability to quickly get to an injured or dying person? If it was your child who had just drowned, would you rather the paramedics hike 100 yards down the beach, or a half-mile as is currently the case with the public accesses? Just a few minutes really does make the difference between life, death or brain damaged forever!

As an emergency physician, my primary focus is always on safety for everyone, but then there is a matter of our beaches and the ocean. These are some of our greatest treasures, and we must honor and preserve them for all to use. Not just the wealthy individuals and corporations who can afford to build their homes and resorts on the beach, thereby blocking access to others.

I say this even though I'm a homeowner in Lanikai, where increased usage of the beach by tourists and people outside of our neighborhood has significantly affected the environment. I still believe this beach and every beach in Hawaii must be available and easily accessible to all. Once you start locking gates, where does it stop?