By LP Hastings
By Michael Goldstein
By R. Scott Moxley
By Gustavo Arellano
By Gustavo Arellano
By Matt Coker
By Nick Schou
By Bethania Palma Markus
Letters may be edited for clarity and length. E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org, or send to Letters to the Editor, c/o OC Weekly, 1666 N. Main St., Ste. 500, Santa Ana, CA 92701. Or fax to (714) 550-5908.
TURN AND COUGH
I wanted to commend the testicular fortitude of the Weekly for printing my response, albeit edited, to Nick Schou's May 18 article, "Dude, Where's My Pot?" [Letters, June 7]. You have outclassed the Los Angeles Times, which is notoriously arrogant and has an official policy to not print such letters. Kudos and thank you.
Susan Kang Schroeder
Public Affairs Counsel
OC district attorney's office
The real issue is that the billionaire developers want to make access for more development so they can sell more million-dollar homes along the new roads. This is what will pollute the creek and destroy the area along Trestles Beach. That douchebag from GeoSoils is even diverting the issue to environmental sediments from the toll road itself. It's really about the development of houses, businesses and infrastructure that will destroy the environment there.
I can't believe how cops can get away with so much, even if everything points to the fact that they did wrong. If this would have been any other man, the conviction would have been there. He would have had a jail sentence and sex-offender status on him. Police departments wonder why citizens can't believe in them. Great reporting.
Please tell me, if you can, what is the present state of Mr. Benefiel's case? From the information presented here [R. Scott Moxley's "How Not to Commit Suicide," May 31], this is tragedy added to a preexisting tragedy. This man is NO criminal! The presiding judge has seriously and unacceptably misjudged the facts. Surely there must be a way to right this wrong. I believe Mr. Benefiel should NOT have served 30 months so far—let alone the total of 27 years and four months in prison he has been sentenced. Aside from the facts presented in this article, perhaps the "true victim's" 86-year-old father did not give an adequate or accurate assessment to the authorities when he placed that fateful call? I mean, Mr. Benefiel has had no history of violence himself. Seems his worst "crime" was that of having lost his ability to cope along with his will to live following a long series of real bad breaks. Oh, yeah, and of having been stuck with such an incompetent judge (and overzealous prosecutor). What can be done to remove him from prison, where he most definitely does not belong? Free up his prison cot for someone who truly deserves it!
Nice article [Luke Y. Thompson's "The Return of the Drive-In," June 8]. For more drive-in fun, visit our society's website at www.socaldims.com. We are the Southern California Drive-In Movie Society. See you under the stars.
HEY, PERFESSER, WHAT'S ANOTHER WORD FOR PIRATE TREASURE?
I LOVE this review [Luke Y. Thompson's "Bootylicious," May 24]. As much fun, in its own way, as the movie Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End. Thank you for the Cheney/Beckett reference. Kept feeling the political references throughout the film, at least in terms of what it takes for good to conquer evil. So until I can return to see the World's End again, I can relieve the enjoyment the movie brought by reading the review. And isn't that the ultimate compliment a reviewer can get: a sort of duplication (with skewed annotations) of the feeling the film produces?
THEY'RE NOT BOOING, THEY'RE SAYING, "LUUUUUUUUKE!"
I just wanted to say that I really enjoy Luke Y. Thompson's pieces. His style and wit make for continual good reading.
Web Surfer Girl
OKAY, THIS IS BOOING
I disagree very much with the ¡Ask a Mexican! column. The guy doesn't say anything SMART. At the very least, he could say the truth about the real Mexico, but he has no idea. He is just saying things that U.S. citizens like to hear, to get fun. This is a shame for your news company. You might work with the truth. He has no idea. I'm a Mexican, and I just can't stand to read those comments. It's not a smart column.
In opening, I'd like to applaud you for giving Mexicans, or at least Latinos, a voice. I watched the report on Gustavo Arellano's column on Univision. I can't say that everything he says was wrong, but it was at the very least inaccurate. I don't wish to discredit Mr. Arellano's credentials, I wish to challenge his responses to questions that represent (at least according to your column) Mexicans. I can guarantee that you have chosen the wrong person to speak for the largest minority in the USA, if you can call us that. I do not hold a master's degree or whatever qualifications you felt Mr. Arellano had when you appointed him as your columnist. I hold an ASS. I have done more work and met more people—or should I say true Mexican people—in my line of work than Mr. Arellano could hope to meet in his lifetime. The only demographic you are satisfying is the Anglo-Saxon who is your major source of income. I formally challenge Mr. Arellano and his position as your source to Mexican questions. Mr. Arellano is a coconut. White on the outside, brown on the inside.
Joaquin Becerril Jr.
Editor's note: Wait, doesn't he have that coconut thing backward? What is white on the outside and brown on the inside, anyway? A Zero bar? A grizzly bear in an igloo? Certain varieties of fig? Li'l help?
MMMMMM . . . TAMPICO
The following letter is in regards to Gustavo Arellano's May 31 ¡Ask a Mexican!
"Any sucker willing to cross deserts and rivers or crawl through sewers for the chance of a better life deserves a shot at citizenship" as long as they don't feed children "Flamin' Hot" Cheetos—PULEEZEEE!!!! How many families do YOU know that don't have a case of Cheetos and a few cartons of Tampico in their fridge. Right.
GET OFF MY LAWN
The following letter is in response to R. Scott Moxley's May 11 article, "The Beer That Made Tustin Infamous."
The thin line between private and public property has taken some to jail. What is considered "private property"? Is a gated community really considered private property? Looking through Internet and paper listings of apartments for rent, a number of them claim to be private and gated. This means all grounds within the gates are private property. Can one consume alcohol by the pool or not? Does this mean one is allowed to carry arms within his/her gated community?
Cases that deal with public intoxication in a gated community boggle me of what's right or wrong. I believe that a gated community, given the 3-foot-fence law, is considered to be private property whether the ease of public entry is great or not. If someone really wants to get in, they're going to by any means necessary. Tenants should not suffer from propped-open gates; it's the property foreseer's responsibly to keep them closed.
IT'S ALL ABOUT M.E.
The Weekly has an immediate opening for a managing editor. The position requires finely honed writing, editing and management skills. The managing editor must be able to guide both experienced and beginning staff writers in producing superior magazine-style stories as well as supervise the day-to-day operations of the editorial department. The most promising applicants will be asked to take an extensive editing test. Interested applicants should contact Ted B. Kissell, editor, at OC Weekly, 1666 N. Main St., Ste. 500, Santa Ana, CA 92701. E-mail email@example.com. No phone calls, please.
Find everything you're looking for in your city
Find the best happy hour deals in your city
Get today's exclusive deals at savings of anywhere from 50-90%
Check out the hottest list of places and things to do around your city