A recent letter writer thinks that Rich Lowry might change his thinking on gun control since the Navy Yard shootings. He talks about “reasonable” gun restrictions. Really? What are those?
The shooter, who had been a normal, sane person prior to his mental deterioration, passed all “reasonable gun restrictions.”
He was using a shotgun — a weapon recently endorsed by our vice president — with no large capacity magazines. He had passed background checks. He, in fact, had a security clearance from the government. Most of us wouldn’t have as many things in our favor as this guy did.
Also, limiting magazine size does not impose much of a deterrent to shooting. A person I know can change his magazine in two to three seconds. And he’s not a highly practiced shooter. Just a guy with a gun.
The real plan with these “reasonable” gun regulations is that these are the “camel’s nose in the tent.”
“Why do you need 30 rounds?” they ask. And reasonable people would say, “I don’t need it.” But that sets us up for more “reasonable” regulations down the road.
Nobody needed machine guns when Capone’s gang was shooting up Chicago, so there was little uproar about infringing on our rights. But now what are described as “reasonable” gun laws would actually infringe on our rights. If they worked, wouldn’t we be done with gun crime by now?
The Navy Yard shootings shouldn’t change anybody’s mind about reasonable restrictions. They don’t work; they can’t work. People are the greatest weapon, and there’s no restriction on people.
Gloria B. Jenkins
I am not a politician or a lawyer but I am a former school teacher, coach and administrator. Maybe I don’t understand the actual legalities, but I do not understand the uproar about school officials, teachers and employees using their time to improve schools for their children. Although it may not be in their job description, school district employees do what is best for their students and put in well over the time required to do so.
I know Berkeley County School Superintendent Rodney Thompson personally because I coached him and hired him as a teacher and a coach at Summerville High School. I would hire him again in a minute. I cannot understand the motive behind people trying to make his job more difficult by taking up his time with a stupid lawsuit when his time is better spent working for the district.
I have noticed a great improvement in the Berkeley district under his tutelage. He is a fine man. Maybe I should file a lawsuit to demand that all school employees be paid overtime for all that they do over and above their job description. As a side note, we are entitled to vote, and the voters of BCSD approved the referendum.
James S. Yarborough
In my grammar school we had a guy who was a mean bully. He would block kids from going through a gate, or not let them on playground equipment. When he didn’t get his way he pushed people around, and he strutted around like he was king of the playground. He never took responsibility for his actions.
Well, ever since this government shutdown, I have seen and heard President Obama name calling and blaming this one and that one for his poor performance as president. He has bullied people by not allowing WWII veterans to visit their memorial and putting more armed guards around it than he did around our embassy in Benghazi. He reminds me of the school bully.
Oh, by the way, someone finally stood up to that bully and bloodied his nose. That ended his kingship.
My family has been part of the Charleston community since 1729. My immediate family has enjoyed four generations being Clemson alumni.
I cannot understand the thinking of proposing another out-of-place building at the corner of Meeting and George streets in the middle of Charleston’s historic area, (what’s left).
We remember quite well the out-of-place library building on King Street. Our Charleston Preservation Society and city officials must maintain our historic value, or all is lost.
Herman B. Speissegger Jr.
Congress could not agree on a resolution to fund the government going forward. Who is to blame for the government shutdown?
The House, with a Republican majority, was planning to send a bill to the Senate, where the Democrats hold the majority.
It would: 1) fund the government through mid-December, providing more time for discussion; 2) postpone enactment of Obamacare for one year for individuals in the same way the president has postponed it for thousands of large businesses and special groups; and 3) ensure that members of Congress, the White House and other federal employees would neither be exempt from Obamacare (as they are now) nor receive taxpayer subsidies for their health insurance.
Why do the Senate and the president think that “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” is not “affordable” for a member of Congress (average annual salary of $174,000), but insist that it is affordable for “we the people,” most of whom earn much less?
Does this proposal by the House seem reasonable? Harry Reid, Senate Leader and a Democrat, rejected the proposal and refused even to bring it to a vote in the Democratically controlled Senate.
Poll after poll shows that the majority of the American people do not want Obamacare in the form it was pushed through. Reid’s refusal to put the House proposal to a vote means that no senator running for re-election has to vote for or against it on the record.
Now the liberal media, Harry Reid, the Democrats, and the president are blaming the Republicans for being irresponsible and causing the government to shut down. In my view Harry Reid and the president are clearly responsible.
Have we seen any presidential leadership at work to resolve issues between the two parties? Why is it lacking?
Bishop Gadsden Way
The American public is not all that bright. After decades of being shabbily treated by the Republican Party, a good 45 percent of them still vote for the guys. It is especially true in my homeland South, where ignorance and low educational levels put these states near the bottom in just about everything.
I remember as a 12-year-old chuckling at the antics of the Georgia legislature on TV and the pseudo-intellectualism of William Buckley.
But now we have Rush Limbaugh and Rupert Murdoch’s 24/7 trash to deal with (Fox News, Wall Street Journal, NY Post), and a couple of Texas bumpkin brothers (the Kochs), whose daddy gave them silver spoons, paying for the Heritage Foundation to spew out a daily dollop of hen droppings on Washington.
But even Pavlov’s dogs could be trained. The secret is repetition. And that is precisely the track that appears most likely by Republican strategists.
While I would personally prefer a default now, followed by a presidential statement that he will not abide by this laughably unconstitutional law, I suspect that Republicans will back down in a last minute theatrical move for a short-term extension of the debt limit. It’s all about theatrics these days.
But this plays into the hands of the Democrats as we go into an election year. Already it is looking like the Republicans may lose the House, and a continuation of this shutdown-default farce is poor politics.
Every way they turn, the Republican strategy of continuous harassment is failing.
America was once a naturally right-center country. I believe that is changing rapidly. Pavlov’s dogs.
William A. Johnson