THREE THUMBS up for the Globe's recent coverage of the debate surrounding the dangers of metal baseball bats.
Your Aug. 23 editorial "Swinging for safety" was excellent; your Aug. 24 City & Region story about the Public Health Committee's hearing at the State House ("Youth bat debate steps up to plate") was accurate and balanced; and the Globe West piece on baseball bat tester James Sherwood ("At bat: baseball's tech arm," Aug. 24) was most informative.
After all this reading, though, I still have two questions:
If a baseball hit off the handle or shaft of an aluminum bat is capable of killing a pitcher, but a ball hit off the same location of a wooden bat can cause no more damage than a broken bat, wouldn't that fact alone make a metal bat more dangerous than a wooden one?
Wouldn't it be better to have a cracked bat than a cracked skull?
RICHARD A. CAREY, Needham