Letters on gun sales, war on terrorism, neglecting inner city, climate change deniers

More gun ownership does not make us safer

Sunday’s article about gun sales was disappointing and, frankly, made me sad (“Gun industry scrambles to keep up with demand,” Feb. 7 Eagle). With its matter-of-fact tone – that of course people would be purchasing automatic weapons and silencers and that first-time buyers and women would be getting guns “to be safe” – the article completely left out the other truth.

Owning a firearm does not make you and your family safer. Suicide, accidents and having one’s own gun used against him are far more likely than using a gun to stop “a bad guy with a gun.” And while crime rates in some categories did go up recently, we still have a historically low crime rate.

More guns mean more toddlers will find Mommy’s gun in her purse, more boyfriends will resort to their gun instead of their fist, and more troubled youths will use a relative’s gun to solve their depression. The article could have at least addressed these truths alongside its normalization of gun ownership.

War is asymmetrical

The Republican presidential candidates seem to feel that Americans are overwhelmed by the fear of terrorism. They are mistaken. Americans are not quaking in fear. To the contrary, we are mad.

The basic military problem facing us is not a strong military power embodied in some foreign state. Instead, we are involved in an asymmetrical war with relatively weak nongovernmental, fanatical ideologues whose members are quite prepared to sacrifice their lives if, by doing so, they can kill more of us than of themselves.

This is a totally different war than the world has ever faced. It is made possible by the Internet and social media, which allow the fanatics to communicate with, and to isolate, those individuals who, for whatever reasons, feel alienated from their own society. There is, and always will be, a small but significant minority in every human society who feel alienated.

Terrorists understand this, and understand how to radicalize many such individuals. For example, they can persuade an alienated couple with a newborn child to desert the child and to sacrifice their two lives if they can kill even more of us.

Contrary to what the Republican presidential candidates say, the threat does not arise because we have a weakened military. We have the strongest military in the world. The real question is whether or not our military is also the smartest.

Neglecting inner city

I would like to applaud the Wichita City Council for its approval of the new library (Feb. 3 Eagle). I would like to, but I question how we can afford it.

It has always been my understanding that the main function of the council is to provide infrastructure for the entire city, including the inner city. I want to bring attention to just one example of its failure to do that.

North Waco is a four-lane street from Douglas to 15th Street. At 15th it goes down to two lanes. The water main under Waco is so old it breaks often; the city digs out a chunk, repairs the line, throws some asphalt in the hole and leaves. After a few cars run over it, you have a hole almost as bad as the first one. In a month or so, a contractor comes in and patches it with concrete, and we are all set for the next one.

Waco was originally paved with brick and still is from 17th to 21st streets. The water line broke between 19th and 20th and a large portion of the brick was removed, and they patched it with asphalt. The results were less than satisfactory. With encouragement of the council member at the time, it was resurfaced from 17th to 21st with good but temporary results.

This is just one example among many in the inner city. Perhaps five members of the City Council could benefit from a remedial course in the functions of city government.

Follow the money

Alas, still another letter from a climate change denier (“Warming false alarms,” Feb. 6 Letters to the Editor). The writer asked: “How much longer can vain environmentalists expect us unenlightened rubes to pay attention to their consistent false alarms?”

A more enlightened question would be: How much longer will the public continue to be deceived by the well-organized campaigning paid for by the fossil fuel lobby? Follow the money. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that people who sell oil and coal are the ones who stand to lose the most if our legislators stop taking their campaign contributions and pass cap-and-trade laws.

Millions of dollars have been donated to organizations whose purpose is to undermine the public perception of climate change. The donors use intermediaries such as Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund so they can be anonymous. Yet if the folks who are financing climate change denial had a legitimate case, they would not need to remain anonymous.

Moreover, we’ll never know how many millions have been contributed to the campaigns of the politicians who fail to enact legislation that would make a difference.

Take heed, climate change deniers. Not only is climate change already in the process of happening, there is a scientific consensus that human activity is the main cause of it.

This story was originally published February 11, 2016 at 6:04 PM with the headline "Letters on gun sales, war on terrorism, neglecting inner city, climate change deniers."