As to the latest debates about gun control and mass killings, no one can predict the mind of a sick individual. If he cannot pass the identity background check, I guess a bomb will do the same thing as a gun — mass killing.
The point was just proven. You do not need a gun to kill masses.
So what now?
We continually hear about attempts, some unsuccessful, some successful by terrorists, mostly Muslims to cause harm and death to innocent citizens around the world.
There are over 1 billion Muslims in the world. If only 0.1 percent are radicals that still leaves 100,000 terrorists out there plotting our demise.
My question is where are the other 999,900,000 Muslims to step up and castigate these jihadists? That may be an unfair fight but the world will root them on and be better off if they rise up and eliminate those radicals.
Step up, peaceful Muslims!
Roger K. Steel
Marsh Hen Drive
Here’s a new word for your readers – allide. Allide is a nautical term meaning “to impact or hit a stationery object.”
An example: A U.S. Navy patrol boat on a routine training mission allides with the Charleston Harbor jetty.
And then the City of Charleston’s new toy, I mean fire boat, allides with channel marker No. 25 on the way to rescue the patrol boat. You can’t make this stuff up.
Think back to the night of Dec. 5, 2009, when a Coast Guard response boat (CG 25689) and a passenger vessel (Thriller 09) collided in the harbor south of Crab Bank.
The National Transportation Safety Board faulted both crews. This writer thinks the NTSB cut the Coasties a break, since a picture of CG 25689 after the accident clearly shows a Furuno radar antenna jauntily perched on the top of the response boat’s cabin, but that’s another story.
But who suffered as a result of the Dec. 5 incident? The operators of Thriller 09 lost their livelihood in the deal, and the Coast Guard just kept on keeping on.
They can do anything with impunity because we work for the government, and the taxpayers will pay and pay and pay to fix their toys if broken them or buy new ones. No worries.
Don’t get me wrong: The Coast Guard and other folks have a tough job, and I respect them and thank them for the work they do to protect our waterways. But …
Let’s hold the professionals operating those two vessels on April 13 fully accountable, and maybe even spend $2,000 to buy them each a chartplotter and teach them to use it.
South Carolina deserves elected officials who consistently act in the public interest with the highest ethical standards. Too often nepotism, greed and outside interests infiltrate the democratic process and, as recent scandals have shown, stronger safeguards are needed to protect our form of government.
For the first time in over 20 years, the Legislature is poised to enact major ethics reform, and our elected officials need to hear that South Carolina voters insist on meaningful and enforceable ethics laws.
At a minimum, significant ethics reform must include:
1) independent, thorough investigation of alleged violations for all public officials by a single statewide ethics commission;
2) full disclosure of all sources of income received in any form, including consulting fees and gifts-in-kind;
3) full disclosure of both paid and unpaid fiduciary positions, such as boards and commissions, and relationships with appointed officials.
Contact your legislators now and ask that these provisions be enacted. The deadline for the S.C. Senate or House to pass an ethics reform bill in this legislative session is May 1. For your legislators and their contact information, go to http://www.scstatehouse.gov/legislatorssearch.php .
Mary M. Horres
What South Carolina needs in Washington, D.C., is a congressman who knows how to “play the D.C. game.” We need an experienced politician, and that is Mark Sanford.
Elizabeth Busch may be a medium-size fish in the Charleston pond, but she has no D.C. experience. She would be no more than a freshman in a group of seniors.
Who pays attention to a freshman?
I do not condone some of Mark Sanford’s personal choices, but “ye without sin may cast the first stone.”
As a father he made the choice to stay at his ex-wife’s home with his young son while the child’s mother was out-of-town.
I am a Democrat, but I’m supporting Mark Sanford.
I read a “sentence” to the editor last Saturday that stated you do not have to be a Democrat to vote for Colbert Busch. While that is a complete sentence it is still incomplete.
It should say that you do not have to be a Democrat to vote for Colbert Busch but you do have to be a flaming liberal. She needs to come out of the “busches” and answer the questions as to her position on several key issues like unions, Obamacare, Pelosi’s contribution, etc.
Notice about comments: