Mediaboss Marketing

Have you had enough yet? Three shootings in the Fargo/Moorhead area in a week. Two 6 year olds shot. Two national mass shootings in a week. A mass shooting in Minnesota last month. School children need to practice active shooter drills. Have you had enough yet?

RELATED

New Zealand, Australia, Great Britain, and Canada have had mass shootings. However, they enacted strict gun control in weeks and months. What endures the U.S. to continue to allow gun violence?

In 2016 the National Rifle Association spent $100 million in paying lobbyists and buying political attack ads. In 2020 it was $50 million. If you pay membership fees to the NRA, do you realize you are paying to keep the violence?

No civilian should own a military style rifle. Automatic and semi-automatic rifles are not made for target practice, they are made to kill many people in a short amount of time. If you think it is OK for you to own one because you don't intend to kill anyone, others may have malicious intent. Giving them up is for the good of society as a whole.

This isn't about your Second Amendment rights. When the Constitution was written, guns only fired once before needing reloading. This isn't about hunting. You can hunt with a hunting rifle. This isn't about your entertainment. Find another hobby so others can live.

There are more guns in the U.S. than people. The argument that the more guns you have, the safer you'll be is statically incorrect. Imply limits on the number of pistols owned. Why does anyone need so many?

Say no to businesses that advertise weapons. Say no to NRA memberships. Willingly surrender your AR rifles. Write your senators and legislators. Support gun reform. It is time to say "Enough."

Beth Ann Volk, Moorhead, is a former member of The Forum's Readers Board.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.

Visit link:
Letter: This isn't about hunting, entertainment or your Second Amendment rights | INFORUM - INFORUM

Mahalo for supporting Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Enjoy this free story!

Second Amendment outlives its purpose

That America stands out in gun-related deaths, where mass shootings have become almost routine, is due to one simple fact, according to gun violence research: There are far too many guns, too easily acquired, in the hands of too many Americans.

America justifies this with the belief that gun ownership is an unalienable right of its citizens. This belief is enshrined in the Second Amendment, which has far outlived its purpose.

Today, anyone who wishes to bear arms to protect the state can join the National Guard. It is a myth that unregulated gun ownership will produce a well regulated Militia necessary to protect freedom.

It is past time to repeal the Second Amendment. It has become the greatest impediment to meaningful gun ownership regulation. Remove this crutch to those Second Amendment politicians who argue that unregulated gun ownership is worth this horrible cost to society.

Arthur Mersereau

Manoa

Consult doctor on allergies to vaccines

With respect for those worried about getting vaccinated because of either underlying conditions or possible allergic reactions, the wisest course would seem to be addressing this directly with your doctor (Those with allergies need vaccine reassurance, Star-Advertiser, Letters, March 25). Ideally this professional has your records, sees you annually and is trained to give you current, correct advice.

As for places that are medically prepared in case of problems, it seems reasonable to assume that the state Department of Health could answer those questions.

Having received my vaccinations at Pier 2, I was thoroughly reassured through the entire process that my well-being was under close observation, including the post-shot monitoring period.

Andrea Bell

Kailua

State keeps changing the rules on vaccines

During the past three months, the state said that people with medical issues will be classified in the 1c category. Now that we are in the 1c category, the state is changing its mind, only allowing people with serious medical issues to get the vaccine.

It also seems that people with these issues arent in the 1c category anymore, having to wait for their age group to get the vaccines. Except for our kupuna, people with medical issues can suffer greatly if they catch COVID-19, possibly even threatening their lives.

It is disappointing that Lt. Gov. Josh Green doesnt help people in this group get their vaccines. As a doctor he should know that this group can suffer if they catch COVID-19. I was hoping that Green wouldnt continue the Ige legacy of being wishy-washy, but he continues the legacy of poor planning and not keeping the public in the decision-making process.

Stan Sano

Makiki

Parentage, not paternity, crucial

The commentary, Birth certificates should identify paternity, not parentage (Star-Advertiser, Island Voices, March 23) is unsurprisingly sexist. The author said that birth certificates are to identify the biological participants in the creation of the baby.

No, they are not. To frame birth certificates as an inconsequential biological record is lazy and self-serving to those empowered by the traditional family model.

Birth certificates establish parental rights, are critical documentation to travel, provide authority for health care decisions and school applications, just to list a few.

Current laws allow male partners to volunteer their information on birth certificates. Only male partners. To not allow female or non-binary partners this option is outdated and discriminatory. A bill in the Legislature attempts to rectify these current prejudices.

The legislation in question is an intersectional feminist issue, an issue on the financialized penalty imposed on those who exist outside of, and in spite of, gender binaries and patriarchy.

Chauncey Hirose-Hulbert

Manoa

Include parentship on birth certificates

Birth certificates should identify paternity, not parentage (Star-Advertiser, Island Voices, March 23), was a thoughtful and important article. I support the author.

Instead of ditching paternity in the current formula, why not keep paternity but add parentship as a separate, alternative field on birth certificates?

This subject puts me in mind of a recent article in the Star- Advertiser about COVID-19 vaccines and the difficulty of manufacturing, and shortages of, biologic medications. Why deny future science the possibility of pursuing the biological trail?

Scarlett Zoechbauer

Makiki

EXPRESS YOURSELF

The Honolulu Star-Advertiser welcomes all opinions. Want your voice to be heard? Submit a letter to the editor.

>> Write us: We welcome letters up to 150 words, and guest columns of 500-600 words. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and length. Include your name, address and daytime phone number.

>> Mail: Letters to the Editor, Honolulu Star-Advertiser 7 Waterfront Plaza, 500 Ala Moana, Suite 210 Honolulu, HI 96813

>> Contact: 529-4831 (phone), 529-4750 (fax), letters@staradvertiser.com, staradvertiser.com/editorial/submit-letter

Read more:
Letters: State keeps changing the rules on vaccines; Second Amendment outlives its purpose; Parentage, not paternity, crucial - Honolulu...

Why protecting the Second Amendment matters

I disagree with the recent letter urging the Tiverton Town Council to rescind the Second Amendment-related resolution passed two years ago. Had the writer researched the resolution, she would have discovered that it did not make Tiverton a sanctuary city.After some emotional testimony by a few individuals predicting that, if made so, the streets would run red with blood, the council adopted a compromise. The resulting resolution became a bulwark against the potential abuse inherent in so-called Red Flag laws, stating that the town will expend no resources in supporting them. It also reaffirmed that the citizens of Tiverton believed in the rule of law, specifically the state and federal constitutions, a concept frightening to progressives.

While red flag laws were sold to legislators by anti-firearms groups as public safety measures,their real intent was the creation of a tool to isolate and persecute individuals who choose to exercise their civil right to own a firearm. They allow anyone to make a phone call claiming someone they know (or don't like) is planning a mass shooting. With no warning, local police then descend on the individual, search their homes, confiscate their private property (firearms), arrest them and begin a lengthy investigation certain to ruin their lives and reputations, whether or not the accusation is true. The accused is never told who their accuser is and there is no penalty for making a false accusation. These are laws with the potential for extreme abuse. They also have the potential for wasting vast amounts of scarce police resources, things the town council, two years ago, recognized. If the current council rescinds the resolution, then theirs is a vote to sanction, and pay for with tax dollars, the persecution of local firearm owners, something that will not endear them to the majority of town residents.

Finally, I infer by the tone of the writer's letter that she is either a member of, or has been influenced by, one of the small, but noisy, anti-Second Amendment groups operating in the state. Her assertion that firearm owners are protected by the Second Amendment is laughable, considering that there are now 11bills (more on the way) in the R.I. Statehouse specifically designed to destroy firearms ownership in this state; all of them crafted with the heavy-handed aid of these groups.

And this prompts a gentle warning to all those reading this. These groups are notorious for lying to and deceiving their members in order to create and spread hysteria, thus advancing the political agenda of their wealthy out-of-state benefactors. Sadly, this callous practice often makes believers look foolish, at best, when faced with the truth.

Scott McCarthy,Tiverton

See original here:
OPINION/LETTER: Why protecting the Second Amendment matters - newportri.com

This op-ed by Trish Zornio appeared on Colorado Newsline on March 25, 2021.

This weeks article started out about Colorados response to the pandemic. It was quickly upended on Monday afternoon when less than 15 minutes from my house a massacre unfolded at the local King Soopers. By 2am, 10 of our neighbors were confirmed dead. It was the same store where my roommate had bought groceries a few days prior.

For the last 48 hours or so, my social media feeds have been heavy in sorrow, anger and despair. The feeling of hopelessness looms large, and text messages pour in to ask if Im OK. Most of the time I dont have the energy to explain why although Im safe, Im not all right. Its not just this event, or even that I knew one of the victims. Its that for my generation and the generations after me this already is our normal, and it has been for over 20 years.

I was in middle school when Columbine happened. I remember our teachers talking to us about what it meant, and what we would do if it happened at our school. Now that Im the teacher, students ask me what the escape plan is and its not just teens or young adults. When my nephew started the first grade, he once told me not to worry because now that he was taller he could climb out of the window faster. He was so casual about it, too, like he was talking about growing into the next pant size.

Youd think after growing up with domestic terrorism Id be used to it. Im not. Theres no getting used to the fear it stokes in communities, or the ripple of hurt it causes. It hits me hard every time. But what hurts the most is how little Congress has done to stop it, as if it doesnt matter at all.

Addressing gun violence is no doubt a multifaceted issue, but to suggest gun access isnt part of the problem is to stick ones head in the sand. However, instead of Congress acting, an extremist political right has blocked damn near every effort toward gun safety for decades. Theyve gone so far as to make it illegal for the government to even study the problem, or to enact full background checks. In many places, its now easier to buy a gun than it is to vote.

Today, these right-wing extremists have co-opted the Republican platform. In doing so, they are making a mockery of responsible gun owners. Long gone are the days of Republicans promoting safe storage, safety training and respect for a deadly weapon. Now, a flamboyant cast of disgruntled Trumpers have lined up to sensationalize and fetishize gun appeal as part of a larger, violent and frequently conspiratorial narrative and one of the ring leaders is right here in Colorado.

From lavishing firearms for campaign props to unsafe storage, Rep. Lauren Boebert has used her antics to flout just about every basic principle of gun safety there is. She has blatantly disregarded Capitol Police metal detectors, expressed her intent to (or did) break open carry laws in Washington, D.C., is speculated to have broken House rules by carrying her gun to the floor, added gunshots to campaign ads for bombastic effects, permitted an underage waitress to carry in her restaurant and more. Once, the first-time congresswoman even accepted a firearm as a gift in her official capacity, subjecting herself to extensive ethical and legal scrutiny.

For some, the vigor with which she claims to defend the Second Amendment is exactly the appeal. Yet her ammosexualized performances should rightfully terrify every responsible gun owner in America. By allowing violent extremists to flagrantly toss aside gun safety principles, Republicans have inadvertently accessorized firearms to a point which makes abundantly clear the absurd laxity of our current laws.

In fact, if extremists like Boebert continue to push against any gun safety regulations, Id suggest its precisely the right-wing gun nuts who will ultimately be the downfall of the Second Amendment. They will, in essence, have loved it to death.

Im hardly the first to note extremist escalations require constitutional overhaul. Consider, for example, the remarks by the late Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens who authored an op-ed for The New York Times titled, Repeal the Second Amendment.

In his essay, Stevens essentially argues that due to a case pushed by the National Rifle Association in 2008, the long-held narrow legal interpretation of the Second Amendment has already been compromised. He, and others, suggests the only way to repair this breach and achieve gun regulation is to repeal and replace it with a constitutional amendment.

If that sounds radical, remember that Stevens was a lifelong Republican. Which leads me to suggest that Democrats should claim Stevens argument to highlight how right-wing extremists have effectively destroyed the Second Amendment in the first place.

No one can undo the hurt from the past couple days or the last couple decades, for that matter. But we must act.

If I could, this time Id take aim at 2A.

Special to the Post

The Pagosa Daily Post welcomes submissions, photos, letters and videos from people who love Pagosa Springs, Colorado. Call 970-903-2673 or email pagosadailypost@gmail.com

See the article here:
OPINION: Loving the Second Amendment to Death - Pagosa Daily Post

On Monday, the House General Laws Committee is hearing House Bill 1068, to ensure Second Amendment rights remain protected during states of emergencies. Please contact committee members and ask them to SUPPORT HB 1068.

House Bill 1068 designates firearm businesses as essential and prohibits the state, government officials and agencies, or local governments from prohibiting, restricting, or reducing their operations during declared states of emergencies or disasters.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many anti-gun officials around the country, at both state and local levels of government, took the opportunity to unilaterally suspend Second Amendment rights by shutting down gun stores and ranges. Unfortunately, this coincided with many Americans trying to exercise their Second Amendment rights for the first time during that period of uncertainty, and resulted in them being unable to access arms, ammunition, or proper training. HB 1068 protects the exercise of a constitutional right from such politically motivated attacks and ensures that citizens have those rights when they need them most.

Again, please contact committee members and ask them to SUPPORT HB 1068.

View original post here:
Missouri: Committee Hearing Bill to Protect Second Amendment in Emergencies - NRA ILA