Gun reforms futile
Perhaps our pro “gun control” politicians should read the Aug. 8 Post and Courier commentary by Scott Rasmussen.
In it he referenced statistician Leah Libresco in a Washington Post column following the Las Vegas shooting.
He said, “Her team found that 63% of gun deaths involved suicides. Most of these deaths involved older men. The biggest group of homicides involved young men, generally those who were involved with gang or criminal activity.
“On top of that, roughly 1,700 women were murdered, generally as a result of domestic abuse. The more complex reality showed that passing new gun laws might make some people feel good, but it would not reduce gun violence.”
Our politicians (and all of us) need to seek out the root causes of this violence as opposed to always “blaming the guns,” and move diligently toward helping find and identify those who show signs of potential violence and get them the help they so desperately need
The political cartoon in the Aug. 7 Post and Courier was incredibly offensive. It should be equally offensive to both Democrats and Republicans. It wasn’t funny. It wasn’t instructive.
Such insulting notions serve to divide our country all the more.
Creek Landing Street
A letter to the editor in the Aug. 3 Post and Courier predicting violence by Donald Trump and his supporters after a potential 2020 election defeat was stunning in its blindness. Hilary Clinton, in a pre-election debate, called it “horrifying” that Trump might not accept the 2016 election results.
Yet now, Democrats and their supporters are single-minded to throw out the Electoral College, blame foreign influence, appoint a special counsel whose sole goal was to find some foul on the president and violently protest to overturn the voting process results.
Congress has spent an overwhelming amount of time and effort trying to block and overturn the election instead of doing the people’s business and taking care of their own districts.
Instead of trying to overturn the previous election, it might be useful to consider why the American people voted for a person with personal traits who most see as the perfect role model of what they don’t want their kids to grow up to be like.
That remains impossible for them to do as it would require the ultra-liberal worldview they want us to believe is mainstream be put to the test.
For that view to remain undisputed, it has to be that the Russians, with the compliance of white male racists and anyone else defined as uneducated despicables, unjustly stole the election. It could never be that average Americans are just not represented by the worldview of socialism, intrusive federal government, open borders and anything goes for their country and children and voted for the only other alternative despite his awful personal traits.
That’s a thought too horrifying for the Democrats to consider. Besides, if they promise to give away enough stuff, they figure they won’t have to.
Hall Point Road
The Mueller report stated that the Russian Internet Research Agency started social media interference in United States politics and elections as early as 2014.
This Russian election interference continued through 2014, 2015 and 2016, years during which President Barack Obama was in power.
Since Mr. Robert Mueller’s team uncovered a plethora of Russian duplicity, one must ask whether James Comey’s FBI, John Brennan’s CIA and James Clapper’s National Intelligence agency were also aware of Russian interference and, if so, why these agencies did not combat it. (Joe Biden blames Mitch McConnell.)
Since the Mueller report concluded that President Donald Trump did not collude with Russia, the argument could be made that the special counsel investigated the wrong president.
South Moss Oak Lane
Remember how we all initially subscribed to cable because it was supposed to be ad-free?
Now, my cable company doesn’t carry programs that are free to people without cable. And in an hour program, it’s a toss-up on whether equal time is given to the show or the commercials.