New ‘common’ sense on guns
We have all heard calls for “commonsense” legislation regarding gun laws, even before the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School. In my opinion, we have received exactly what we settled for: Common sense legislation.
That’s why we don’t have an assault-weapons ban or more strict “regulation” of the “militia,” which the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is meant to provide. So, in the name of “common sense,” we have lapsed legislation, weak regulation and huge loopholes, because the “common” interests of wealth and political power count on the lowest common denominator to win the day.
Slavery used to be common sense. Limiting the vote to white, male landowners used to be common sense. I call on the will of the people and the legislators of this country to go beyond the “common” with the zeal of the civil rights leaders and of the suffragettes and make a new “common” that can be heard above the terrified screams of the children at Sandy Hook.
Never miss a local story.
Look at problems
Letters to the editor have stated in various ways that the Second Amendment was founded on hunting, sport shooting or self-defense. The Eagle should print that portion of the Constitution and the provision to amend the document. It takes more than the House, the Senate and the president to change the Constitution.
When the Second Amendment was written, this nation was in the midst of a revolution to overthrow British rule and establish our nation and the foundation of the new government, which is not a pure democracy. Perhaps we should review what the “tea party” was all about and why George Washington led our troops (civilians) against the forces of the “legal” government of that day.
The obvious dysfunction of the current U.S. government should be a red flag of the severe problems going unaddressed by our leaders of both parties. Another good read is the Declaration of Independence, which sets out reasons for our going to war for the sole purpose of establishing a new government.
Take a look at the problems in Europe, the Mideast and Africa. That could be our future if our monetary, taxing and entitlement problems are not addressed soon.
Not earning pay
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a job that pays an average annual salary of about $174,000, with an additional $1 million or so to hire other personnel for your office, plus funding for general office expenses and mass mailings to your constituents? Yet all many members of Congress do is attend meetings, vote against the initiatives of the president, and refuse to reach consensus on difficult issues. They pout and say, “If it’s not our way, then we won’t let you have your way,” as opposed to working as adults to resolve differences and to compromise.
Our well-paid members of Congress must be reminded that selfishness and closed minds do not resolve differences or solve problems. They also need to be reminded that well-paid employees of other businesses who do not do their jobs, are unwilling to work together for the common good, and unwilling to compromise on difficult issues may very well be fired.
Members of the House of Representatives will be up for re-election in a little less than two years. If they haven’t been doing their job, we as voters certainly have the opportunity to fire them at that time.
Moderates will win. I know because I learned basic math in the second grade.
U.S. fiscal trends of budgeting, borrowing 42 cents for every dollar spent, Medicare, unfunded public pensions and aging infrastructure tell us we can’t keep our current legislative process going. Compromise will be forced upon us. The public understands family budgets. Apparently our current senators and representatives do not. The only choice is to trim programs and cut back funds to states.
If you can’t reach agreements across the aisle to solve problems, you are worthless and will be replaced.