In response to “Stanford animal rights activists fail to beef up argument with comparison to civil rights movement” (by David Weissman, March 27):

Someone needs to clue that man in… his pet is not “his little girl” unless he has some aberrant sexual proclivities. These people need to understand that our house pets (dogs and cats mostly) are carnivores and that cats especially cannot live without the death of another animal.

To compare the raising of livestock with the civil rights movement shows disdain for those involved in the human civil rights movement and utter lack of respect for those involved as well.

I thought Stanford students were smart.

—fearnot

In response to “Tobacco-free campus initiative campaign fails to catch eye of students” (by Kimberlie Wang, March 27)

Actually, according to the online SHAC [UA Student Health Advocacy Committee] petition on change.org, there are 390 signatures (not 369 signatures). Additionally, the last comment was made 6 days ago, not 5 months ago, as you have written.

—U of A Student

You claim “The Sun Devils have just one-upped us.” How is removing the liberty from one group of people one-upping you? This kind of thinking gets me “smoking mad.”

—DDogbreath

In response to “Guest column: Uninformed hate blinds scope of recent immigration column” (by Murphy Woodhouse, March 26):

This is a beautiful article. I often have a hard time arguing with people who share [Daily Wildcat columnist David] Weissman’s views or similar ideas, but can’t find much to elaborate on to people who do not fathom thinking beyond their minds very shallow and narrow walls. If nothing changes now, wait 15-20 years when the implementation of deportation would triple, perhaps quadruple our national debt. Citizenship and arbitrary lines drawn on maps dividing continuous landmasses may hold meaning to some (myself not included), but I hope to see mass naturalization if “illegals” choose to or at the very least work visas.

—North American Denizen