Screen Play To the Editor, Dan Huff's "Disquiet On The Set" (Tucson Weekly, February 27), which examined special interest politics and the Tucson film scene, brought back vivid memories of almost being punched out by a slightly inebriated Bob Shelton in the lobby of the former Hilton Hotel 11 years ago. My 115 pounds versus Shelton's beefy 230 (counting heavy silver belt buckle and cowboy boots) might not have seemed like much of a match. All I had to balance the equation was information. Shelton was furious because I and a small group of brave souls brought to the attention of the City Council and local professionals what the rest of the country already knew: The Tucson Film Commission's ol' boy brokering had even TV Guide and Hollywood trade papers reporting the difficulties of producing films in the Old Pueblo. What followed was like living through a 1940's gangster flick in western drag--complete with months of anonymous threatening phone calls to my home, vandalized vehicles and stolen documents. The old guard played rough for good reason: Hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars were spent during Mayor Murphy's era to promote Shelton's cartel, leaving the majority of the wonderfully talented and capable film professionals in Tucson with no way to make competitive bids for work in a fair and open market. Many fine people were intimidated by the "you'll-never-work-in-this-town-again" threats that were the trademark of the good ol' boys to those who crossed them. I ended up standing before the City Council alone, proposing that a computerized database of all Tucson's talented professionals be made available to producers nationwide--via modem. What an exotic idea! Nothing I've seen in New York or Los Angeles was as blatantly corrupt as that Tucson scene. Today, from my base in Los Angeles, it is clear that open and competitive markets draw location production dollars. Information is a powerful magnetic force. Make it easy for producers to obtain competitive bids. Showcase online the diversity of service, locations, experience and talent available in Tucson. Openly provide information about incoming business. By the way, Shelton's roundhouse punch stopped just short of my chin--the horror on the faces of onlookers helped his better self get a grip mid-swing. Similarly, then-City Manager Joel Valdez's better self took a hard step toward cleaning up what had become an embarrassment for the city by dismantling the Commission. I am fondly grateful to both men for listening to their better selves at those critical moments. Congratulations to The Weekly for pointing out that those who do not remember history are doomed to re-live it. I do not wish a replay of that era on my old friends in the Tucson production community. --Patric Hedlund Beastly To the Editor, Regarding Maria Nasif's "Animal Attraction" (Tucson Weekly, February 27): PETA co-founder Ingred Newkirk says, "No serious thinker can make a valid argument that to discriminate based on species is acceptable." What kind of discrimination is she thinking of? Will we see dogs at lunch counters trying to "integrate" themselves as in the early '60s during the civil rights movement? Seriously, we need biomedical research. We need to find ways to fight disease from prevention to cure. And it will happen less quickly if people like Ingred Newkirk continue their total opposition. As a polio survivor, I am thankful for the work of Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin. They are life-savers. I am not aware of any contribution to curing or preventing disease that has come from PETA or its co-founder. We need biomedical research, but we need to have it strictly regulated so we are sure animals are treated humanely. The researchers I have come in contact with don't go for cruelty to animals and are careful to treat animals in their care the way they should be treated. We also need to pursue ways of dealing with disease that don't involve animal research. One more thing, Ingred Newkirk and many members of PETA support and condone the terrorist actions of organizations like the Animal Liberation Front. She should be aware that violence and intimidation committed against legitimate scientists is wrong and only hurts her cause in the public mind. --Sam Marion Drug Affliction To the Editor, Jeff Smith's "Conscientious Objection" (Tucson Weekly, February 27) was timely, courageous and long overdue. I agree wholeheartedly with every point Jeff made--well, almost. Jeff, I hate to break the news to you, but a significant percentage of the populace is that dumb. This phony, unwinnable and bankrupting war on drugs doesn't continue only because children have been hoodwinked. Children do not vote or pay the taxes that support this "war." The war continues only because a significant percentage of the adult population is naive enough to believe that if we keep spending billions, building more prisons, and incarcerating half the populace, our social problems will finally abate. This same segment of the population believes the more we are able to stanch the flow of "illegal" drugs, the less violent crime and gang problems we will have. Anyone with two eyes, a mind of his own and a basic understanding of economics (remember supply and demand?) can tell you just the opposite is true. I have debated this issue with my parents and in-laws until I am blue in the face. They are convinced decriminalization will lead to a society of addicts and widespread violent crime. They have also been convinced by our government that all drugs are equally debilitating, making no rational distinction between marijuana and crack cocaine, and even if there is a difference, marijuana is the dreaded "gateway drug." If there is any truth to the gateway theory, it is only because persons seeking to purchase marijuana are driven "underground" to dealers who are more than anxious to interest them in their other wares--you know, the kind that will keep them coming back for more. It's the adults who've been fooled, Jeff. By the way, they are called "czars" because these same adults continue to surrender to them more constitutionally protected personal liberties in return for what they believe will be a more orderly and peaceful, drug-free society. Dream on. --Michael D. Stofko Love And Kisses To The Editor: You slimy toilet-licking bastards! Have you no shame? What is the meaning of this? Do you ever stop to think before you write your pompous sentences with the big words from hell? If you people had one iota of human decency, you would never, ever publish such things again, and you would apologize to all the starving orphans and harmless creatures of the forest. And furthermore, there is no need for gratuitous vituperation, you pointless fart heads. --Jake "The Rake" Cardosio We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com

		© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth