Letters to Editor
Amend Constitution Remember Prohibition Armed, but outgunned Paying our union 'dues' A moral shame An unprincipled people Congratulates senator Musial memory Prefers happy photos Different agendas
nWith the epidemic of gun violence, insane firearm laws and the proliferation of ever more lethal weaponry, it is obvious that the Constitution needs to be amended to protect ourselves from ourselves.
The new amendment must be very carefully worded so we know who can bear arms and why. The new amendment should read:
"A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
If the phrase "well-regulated" works out for the Militia, perhaps we can apply that term to many other undertakings. A well-regulated country will help us move towards a more perfect union.
nMy opinion is this: Common sense means you don't rush to judgment and make unwarranted decisions, like imposing on the rights and freedoms of 315 million American citizens of our supposedly free country, because of the horrors committed by a dozen or so unbalanced individuals over a few decades.
The massacre of 20 children and six adults not only sickened the heart of America, but the entire world. But does that mean if several children are killed in school bus accidents or in countless house fires, we, as a narrow-minded society, ban all or most school buses and houses and move backward, having children walk or ride bikes and scooters like the Amish children or live in the grand old comfort of cave dwellings?
Remember Prohibition, when alcohol was banned? Many streets in many cities and towns across this country still have tunnels under them where the underground booze ran and made millions for some people, until the government finally came to its senses and legalized it again.
So if you ban any or all firearms, there will be no shortage. You'll just be transferring the control and wealth to the "underground.'' Is that want we want? Common sense, folks.
nWe've been hearing quite a lot from conservatives lately about how the real reason for our constitutional right to bear arms is not -- as the Founding Fathers imagined -- to maintain "a well regulated militia" for the purpose of protecting the public from a possible British invasion or the occasional Indian uprising.
Rather, the thinking seems to be that we need to have guns to resist the potential tyranny of our own government. This is a notion that is, to put it gently, laughably absurd.
We have a much better way to guard against tyranny in this country: regularly scheduled democratic elections (the government, you see, is actually us). Our Constitution also prevents dangerous concentrations of political power through its checks and balances, as well as through our system of state governments.
And even should the national government somehow lapse into totalitarian despotism, an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle has exactly zero chance against the rocket launchers, tanks, drones and fighter jets available to the world's most powerful military. Self-proclaimed "patriots" would never, ever win.
There may well be legitimate reasons to possess a firearm. But anyone who believes he needs one because he might one day decide to start shooting federal officials simply evinces the kind of mental illness that should disqualify that person from having a gun in the first place.
East Hempfield Township
nDo you really think bigger government is the answer? These government unions are destroying our state, local and federal fiscal budgets.
I really don't care if a private business is unionized. After all, it is a free country for a while yet.
Government workers are paid with my and your tax dollars.
Government workers then pay union dues with what used to be my tax dollars and your tax dollars.
Government unions then use that money that used to be our tax dollars to support radical leftist political candidates and to lobby politicians who are in office for their liberal agenda.
Bad use of my tax money and your tax money, I would say. Let me keep that part of my tax money and use it as I see fit. After all, I earned it trying to make myself a living.
nPresident Obama's inaugural address was morally a shame on the nation. To put his hand on the Bible with the words "So help me God" blasphemed the name of God, as he boldly declared his rebellion against the word of God by promoting homosexuality. Such crass blasphemy, before thousands as the head of this nation, is amazing arrogance that this nation has never seen before. A nation that still professes the Bible is the word of God needs to raise a voice of resistance by declaring unashamedly that homosexuality is still an abomination before a holy God.
nInstead of being a nation guided by principle (of any sort), we have established pragmatism and utilitarianism as our foundational philosophy.
According to pragmatism and utilitarianism, if it works or serves a purpose, it's "good" or "right." Moral principle has been abandoned, ignored or, at best, relegated to a subordinate role in guiding one's decisions. If you look closely, you will see the effects of this on all levels of life.
It is upon this philosophy we justify the legalization of such brutal and inhuman practices as abortion.
Situational ethics (resulting from a nonmoral, Darwinian relativism) dominate absolute truth and the downward spiral begins. This unprincipled "end justifies the means" approach can only produce the culture of death we see springing up on every front. Maybe the answer is to ban scalpels and vacuums.
Michael E. Wolfe
nState Sen. Mike Brubaker:
Yes, Senator, you created additional good will with those who benefit from the proceeds of the state lottery. Your recent hearing on the sale of the state's lottery to the British firm was challenging to the citizenry of this state.
Amongst many of the questions, someone needed to determine was the efficacy of the move, and you stepped forward with your committee hearing to do just that.
A letter published in the Intelligencer Journal/Lancaster New Era [last week] did well to publicly thank you for your concern and the manner in which you handle the business of state before your committee. Lancaster has a good ambassador and a steward of our state issues in you. You make us proud.
Hal and Kathy Weglarz
nAs my Dad was perusing the sports page of the newspaper, I heard him laugh and asked him why he was laughing.
He told this story:
"Many years ago when I was coaching at Carnegie Tech, I went over to Donora (Pa.) to recruit a senior who was a great basketball player who also played baseball and football. He listened politely to my pitch, and when I finished, he said: 'I really appreciate your coming over Mr. Hannum, but I think I'm going to try professional baseball.'
"I replied: 'Now listen, son, you know that only a few make it into the big leagues every year. Why not just forget it, come to Carnegie Tech, get a good education, and play basketball for me.' Sadly, he persisted and I left, feeling he had made a big mistake."
As he told this story, he pointed to a headline which read "Baseball's first $100,000 paycheck goes to Stanley Musial.''
The Rev. Bob Hannum
East Hempfield Township
nI opened the newspaper [Wednesday] to see a picture of a dead bald eagle, I am totally disgusted by the paper displaying this picture for its readers. What good does it do to show a dead eagle? I understand that we need to know about the protection of the eagles, but I don't see why its necessary to view a picture like this. I'm still upset over all the images of the poor cat with an arrow through its head.
Please stop putting pictures of injured or dead animals in our paper. Save the pictures for positive or happy images!
nIn response to Jeff Hawkes' column, Jan. 17, regarding Charles Marohn's presentation about years of questionable urbanization practices:
Hawkes' column is so sincerely written that one is almost compelled to take him seriously. Still, so long as he is so closely associated with a newspaper company that runs a weekly feature in the real estate section that seems to glorify the very type of urbanization that he appears to be denouncing, how can he be taken seriously?
If Hawkes is so concerned about irresponsible urbanization, why not make clear notice in the newspaper of the upcoming meeting so "we the people'' can attend as well?
Submit letters to the Editor
The Sunday News welcomes letters. All must be signed and contain an address and daytime telephone number where the writer can be contacted. Names and municipalities will be used. We will use email addresses if requested. Short letters, 150 words or less, are preferred. The Sunday News will edit letters for style, grammar and length. Deadline is 5 p.m. Thursday.
How to submit letters
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Mail:
P.O. Box 1328, Lancaster, PA 17608-1328.