Razor wire's risky

Your letters last week ["Mail," November 18, 2004] about Shirley Presley's trial seem to be missing the point.

It is my understanding that the trail thing was cleared up and the Rivanna Trail redirected from her property well over a year ago. The court issue is razor wire at ground level– child level.

It just boggles my mind how anyone cannot see it as a bad thing to have such a danger for kids at the edge of one's property. Being a widow or having served in the military during a war has nothing to do with allowing this very unsafe placement of a potently maiming or deadly razor wire.

The issue has obviously touched a button with a few letter writers who feel that every property owner should be free to lay razor wire along their borders no matter who it endangers. Some writers even portrayed Democrats as bad for supporting a child safety measure, and Republicans as good because of their child-endangerment anything-goes ways– I'll bet that's news to the GOP!

If any of these folks who express such outrage at Presley's plight are her friends, I would suggest that they advise her that there are many better ways to do an obstructing boundary that would not have the danger and liability that razor wire has. She appears to need some good advice with this and not some old rants about the trail booboo.

Mike George
Nelson County