Netlets for Thursday, Aug. 23

Please stop calling last week's tragedy a "pit bull attack."

It was a dog attack by an animal whose owner was so afraid of it that he kept it chained to a pole in a dark basement.

We prosecute people for choosing to allow children access to loaded guns. What about someone who insists on cruelly confining a clearly troubled dog in his home and allowing his children unsupervised access to it?

Unfortunately your coverage will probably please the supporters of Rep. John Lesch's breed ban. Responsible journalism, however, should call for a thorough investigation as to why this man was allowed to keep this dog after it bit two other people and why he was able to continue breeding it.

The extremely poor judgment on the part of the adult human in this story would have been a recipe for disaster no matter what the breed of his dog, and that's what needs to be regulated.

JENNY ZANNER, MINNEAPOLIS

Build a good bridge, but don't focus on its century lifespan

Well, certainly. And it will have all the credibility of one put together in 1907 anticipating today's uses.

More likely, in 100 years it will turn out that it should have been made of carbon fiber and had 30 lanes or that people no longer use bridges.

Let's try for one that's good for 40 years without falling down or needing total replacement due to obsolescence. When our credibility is restored maybe we can talk about something a little more long-lived.

RAY ROSSBERG, EDEN PRAIRIE

If roads and bridges are privatized

Perhaps we need to reread Adam Smith on why government-granted monopolies are antithetical to free enterprise? And perhaps we need to revisit the Boston Tea Party regarding the mischief to which government-granted monopolies inevitably lead?

Private ownership of bridges is not comparable to privatizing Social Security or private schools. Privatizing retirement accounts and education provides real choices to citizens on a more level playing field. Selling monopoly rights to roads and bridges does the opposite.

Other questions abound. Are we going to continue to use condemnation of private property so that other private interests can take ownership of that property? What if the highest bidder is a company from China? Or Iran? Or North Korea? Are there no security concerns for private, and foreign, ownership to our roads?

Having safe roads and bridges is a serious concern of our time, but it is not a crisis. A real crisis, however, is the lack of clear distinction between what is private and what is public. Sadly, the march to private ownership of roads and bridges only makes the real crisis worse.

ALLEN QUIST, ST. PETER, MINN.

I grow weary of people calling light-rail transit "social engineering" and complaining that it doesn't "pay for itself."

Our highways, funded almost entirely by tax dollars, and rarely requiring user fees, are a great example of very poor social engineering, but these folks never complain about them. Public utilities are another example of "social engineering" that in most cases required investment by taxes.

I like the idea of being able to reliably travel the metro area by bus or train, just as I like it when clean water comes out of my tap.

LARRY KAATZ, MINNEAPOLIS

Bridge neighborhoods are suffering

The local community around the bridge has seen an expected traffic increase with the recent events, but gawkers have added to this.

I understand that people want to see the site for a variety of reasons. However, when there is a steady stream of people who normally have no business in this area come to view the fallen bridge, it disrupts the lives of those who need to get around. An example of this can been seen with the re-closure of the pedestrian bridge due to those gathering on it.

Out of respect for those live here, and to the families of those who are still missing, please pay your respects in a fashion that won't keep impacting the area in such a negative way.

CLARISSA NELSON, MINNEAPOLIS

Maybe the Fed has itself to blame?

For better or worse, it was the Fed's ultra-easy monetary policy of the 2000s that most contributed to the spectacular rise in home prices and the excess risk taking among borrowers and lenders that came with it. I would think that the current events unfolding are an almost inevitable result of such a boom, and your reporting fails to provide such perspective. Nor does your reporting address any negative consequences of a Federal Reserve rate cut, such as a possible further decline in the dollar, higher inflation or lower rates for savers.

It is my sincere hope that Ben Bernanke does a better job than the maestro that you are comparing him to, the consequences of whose policies he must now manage.