Search engines should help fight crime
Online crime is of growing concern. Content theft, illegal prescription purchases and dangerous content (terrorism videos, bomb-making manuals, etc.) are easily found through search engines like Google, which profit by displaying ads on pages where they share revenues with providers of the content. Payment processors profit as well.
Google and others have consistently avoided working with authorities in an attempt to protect their profits at the expense of privacy, safety and intellectual property. Just because a criminal can’t see the face of a victim doesn’t mean the crime is “victimless.”
Content creators are hurt by having their work stolen. Others are hurt when the activities provide “legitimate” income to organized crime rings, which use it to target the public through identity theft, malware and invasions of privacy.
Attorney General Jon Bruning is taking a stand against these practices. We should all thank him and other attorneys general for their efforts to force these companies to disclose their practices and revenues, and for calling on them to stop selling ads to such groups and to start prioritizing legitimate organizations in online search results.
Timothy F. Dunning, Omaha
Douglas County sheriff
Cougar hunting makes for poor ‘sport’
Concerning the first great cougar hunt in Nebraska, I find it interesting that this is called a sport. The hunters found the tracks and tracked the cougar with the help of dogs and shot it out of the tree. Great sport.
To me, a better scenario would be to track it, tree it and photograph it for someone’s game room. This would prove you were macho without having to kill a beautiful animal.
It seems that most cougars are shot after trying to escape by going up a tree. It must feel good to kill a defenseless creature and watch the life and blood flow out of it.
Bob Clark, Audubon, Iowa
Cougars definitely not tofu eaters
Hunters pay a lot of money to participate in the cougar hunting license lottery. Then even if they get a license, they have to find the cat.
Environmentalists have more important issues to tend to than counting cougars.
The cougars have to eat. Who’s going to pay for the livestock they kill?
If cougars are to be tranquilized and moved instead of hunted, I wonder who should pay for that. We all have families and pets we love.
Guess what? A cougar is not a vegetarian.
Joyce Montgomery, Omaha
Link minimum-wage hike to E-Verify
Democrats are going to try to make us forget about our new health insurance? The way they are going to do this is by increasing the minimum wage.
Since they tried last year to fix the illegal immigration problem without success, I have an idea: Raise the minimum wage so our citizens can make a decent living. But at the same time, make E-Verify mandatory.
We would make our citizens more independent. If illegal immigrants could not work here, they wouldn’t come and we would save the $46 billion on border security! Sounds like something the Democrats would be all for, since Washington would have to borrow nearly half of the $46 billion!
D. Mark O’Neill, Omaha
Health law is Nebraskans’ opportunity
The federal health care website, HealthCare.gov, is an unprecedented opportunity for Nebraskans to learn about health insurance options. Residents should take an active role in ensuring a healthy future and seek out the best plan for themselves and their families.
The Nebraska Department of Insurance has an informational website too, nehealthinsuranceinfo.gov. And you may enroll by phone at (800) 318-2596. Residents need to be enrolled by March 15 to avoid being penalized for not having health insurance.
After enrolling, consumers are committed to that plan until the next open enrollment period, starting Oct. 7, when they can switch. So it is crucial they choose the appropriate plan.
Nebraskans who would like to talk to a local person can contact Community Action of Nebraska (www.canhelp.org), which is a navigator organization that can answer questions and assist with enrollment.
Tom Adams, Omaha
Executive director, National
Alliance on Mental Illness, Nebraska
Protection responsibility is individual’s
It is people’s “responsibility” — the word chosen by Carol Vogt (Dec. 31 Pulse) — to protect themselves and their families.
Vogt concedes that no-guns-allowed signs will not stop illegal guns but offers no explanation as to how the businesses that post the signs are “protecting their customers.”
Is it the job of law enforcement to provide 24/7 protection for families? The police can only be there in minutes when it is seconds that count. That means it is our job, not the government’s job, to protect our families.
A major problem with American society is that we are more concerned with the government helping us than with using our God-given rights to protect our families and neighbors through the means we deem necessary.
Mel B. Shelnutt, Clarinda, Iowa