Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances
Published: Thursday, Sept. 19, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
Lance: To Pyrotecnico. The fireworks company's written statement after an explosion at its July 4 display in Apollo injured a teen girl said it would “conduct a thorough and complete investigation of this incident and make our findings available to the public.” What a crock that turned out to be. Now, Pyrotecnico has clammed up and we've discovered its “investigation” hasn't even included contacting the victim. That's “thorough”?
Lance: To the Fox Chapel School District. Although the concept of “zero tolerance” in our schools has been shown to be “zero common sense,” the high school suspended a student for 10 days for bringing a knife to a football game. But the knife was discovered only when the kid turned it in to a security officer and explained it was an accident. Talk about no good deed going unpunished. And the district wants to be patted on the back because it did not expel the student.
On the “Watch List”: The Endangered Species Coordination Act. We would hope the state Legislature goes slow on approving State Rep. Jeff Pyle's (R-Ford City) proposed law. There are serious questions still unanswered — among others, will the law result in the loss of both federal funds and state sovereignty on the issue? These will need to be addressed before this legislation goes to the governor's desk.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Greensburg Laurels & Lances
- The ObamaCare fight: It’s far from over
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- ObamaCare & minimum wages: A double whammy
- Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances
- Detroit’s bankruptcy: An object lesson
- ‘China City’
- ObamaCare: HIT’s hit
- On regulatory ‘autopilot’: Anchors on the economy
- The Monsour monstrosity