ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh Tuesday takes |

Pittsburgh Tuesday takes

| Monday, August 25, 2014 9:00 p.m

A heinous crime: Each and every shooting in the City of Pittsburgh is a tragedy. But what happened Friday afternoon in broad daylight in the Hill District was heinous. Three shooters opened fire on Tina Crawford, 34, and her mother, Patsy, 63, in their driveway and fled. Tina was killed. Patsy was seriously wounded. Police don’t have a motive. Such wanton killing must stop. And the pathology behind it must be eradicated.

Organized perversion: One of the wags with whom we regularly converse notes the irony of Pittsburgh’s Labor Day parade organizers disinviting Republican Gov. Tom Corbett for his supposed anti-union activities. This would be the same governor, Mr. Wag reminds, who opposes right-to-work laws, paycheck protection, no-strike rules for public school teachers and transit workers and repealing the prevailing wage. Go figure.

Some thanks: On April 9, Sarge Resetar, a Franklin Regional High School security guard, was a hero. Despite being stabbed in the stomach, Mr. Resetar, 70, helped to subdue mass-stabbing suspect Alex Hribal. But on Friday, and without much real explanation, the seven-year veteran was fired by the district’s private security adviser, Capital Asset Protection of Robinson. It cited unspecified “security changes” and says the district concurred with the decision. What a slap.

Categories: Editorials
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.