Readers share thoughts on government, Congress, shooting to kill
Fear in government
Why is it that most politicians of both parties have no problem subsidizing the Iron Dome to protect Israel from enemy air attacks with billions of dollars in taxpayer money but contend they haven’t the funds to build a fence to protect our southern border?
Why do law-abiding citizens get rousted by airport security at major U.S. airports but our esteemed government officials don’t enforce the immigration laws on the books?
What about the continuous and warrantless eavesdropping by the National Security Agency of our emails and cellphone conversations and ubiquitous electronic surveillance? Also, what about the significant militarization of local law enforcement?
It seems to me that since 9/11, with the advent of Homeland Security, the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act, average American citizens are viewed as criminals by our corrupt, tyrannical government. Why is that?
What are the people running our government really afraid of?
George W. Hoeltje
St. James, Mo.
Congress’ tradition
Even Gen. George Washington and his adviser Marquis de Lafayette had trouble dealing with Congress.
Lafayette, in discussing with Gen. Washington his feelings about members, said the following: “What is this Congress — a Moloch? A creature built of high priests? A something with fiery maw that demands sacrifice? It is something that keeps itself in office not by thought and wisdom and a vision for liberty, but renews itself by groveling to all who can get drunk at your elections and make a vote.”
An interesting assessment that gives thought about what many think of the current Congress.
Edward “Gomer” Moody
Kansas City
Shooting to kill
I am a police officer and civilian firearms instructor. There have been letters questioning why police officers shoot to kill.
Police officers and civilians who are trained in using firearms for self-defense are trained to “stop the threat.” Shooting to wound, aiming at an assailant’s extremity, especially in the stress of a life-threatening situation, is a very difficult shot even for a highly trained marksman. This puts innocent bystanders at extreme risk of injury.
Police officers and civilians with concealed-carry permits are trained to shoot at the center of mass — the middle of the chest. Under the extremely stressful circumstances of a self-defense shooting, a center-of-mass shot is safest for innocent persons who may be in the vicinity.
This question is innocently asked by someone with no firearms experience or training. Please find a qualified firearms instructor to conduct a firearms orientation for you, perhaps even involving live fire at a range.
You don’t have to like firearms afterward, but at least you will have fewer misconceptions.
Bruce Luedeman
Independence
Health-care flaws
I wonder why we Americans, through the news media, do not get a point-by-point comparison between our health-care system and those of western and northern Europe and of Canada and Japan.
People in those countries live longer and pay less per capita for health care than we do. They also do not face bankruptcy or home foreclosure because of medical bills.
Their systems resemble Medicare for all, which we have rejected in favor of a system that, under the Affordable Care Act, preserves the principle of keeping health care as a profit-making instead of a nonprofit enterprise as is required in other countries. They also save money by restricting the advertising of prescription medications.
These supposedly more secular societies use the moral argument, as we don’t, in promoting the principle of affordable health care for all. The principle that everyone should contribute so everyone can benefit is a policy that President Harry Truman tried and failed to get through Congress.
He called that the biggest disappointment of his administration, but his example did help prepare the ground for Medicare, signed at the Truman Library by President Lyndon Johnson in 1965.
Niel Johnson
Independence
Athletic scholarships
When a professional basketball team sells for $2 billion and the University of Kansas is elated it has a commitment from a basketball player so young he will not be eligible for the pro draft for two years, the time has come to end the pretense that collegiate sports scholarships afford the opportunity for a college education to many who could not otherwise attend.
While I recognize the necessity of athletes going pro at the earliest opportunity because of the ever-present danger of a career-ending injury and to increase the number of playing years as a highly paid pro, we can no longer pretend college athletic scholarships, at least in basketball and football, are anything more than subsidies for professional teams.
Athletic scholarships for those who want college educations are still a good idea, and my recommendation is that those accepting athletic scholarships would be precluded from going pro until their classes have graduated. My hope is that this would lead to minor leagues in basketball and football much like we now have in baseball.
Harvey A. Jetmore Jr.
Lenexa
Supreme Court pick
I read that Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback selected his former legal counsel, Caleb Stegall, for a position on the Kansas Supreme Court. Brownback chose a rigid ideologist with little judicial experience over two very qualified candidates with years of judicial experience for the highest court in Kansas.
Who didn’t see that coming?
Judi Vallejo
Overland Park
KC recycling hurdles
Is is very sad that Kansas City makes recycling a low priority and so difficult to do, especially for apartment dwellers.
I live in the Quality Hill area. The only recycling container for paper, cans and glass is in the Cathedral parking lot. I am not allowed to use it.
It is always locked and the recycle bin closed. The next closest is in North Kansas City.
So I guess all my plastic bottles, boxes and other recyclables will be in the trash from now on.
So sad, Kansas City.
Elaine Carpenter
Kansas City
Steve Rose column
Steve Rose, in his Sept. 28 column, “He believes in miracles, and that’s too bad,” observes the fact that Gov. Sam Brownback’s program to revive the state economy depends on magical thinking. It is increasingly clear that Brownback’s plan fails because cutting taxes produces less revenue, not more.
But Brownback is not alone in clinging to the Arthur Laffer fallacy of supply-side economics. Many Republicans continue to hold onto the disproven idea that the government will bring in more revenue by lowering taxes.
Data show national debt soared in the Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush presidential years after taxes were slashed. National debt contracted when President Bill Clinton raised taxes.
Rose notes that Brownback believes in miracles, that somehow government will bring in more money by bringing in less money. And Brownback has plenty of company among GOP leadership and rank and file in his magical-thinking approach to economics.
Appealing to popular fantasies that founder in the face of reality always gets some votes. Some of the people can be fooled all the time because they want to be.
James Obertino
Warrensburg, Mo.
Brownback ‘facts’
A recent ad states that Gov. Sam Brownback has put more money into education and has hired about 660 teachers.
The nonpartisan Kansas Center for Economic Growth released a study that contradicts this statement. Since 2009, schools have added 19,000 students and teaching personnel has been reduced by 665.
Read the report at realprosperityks.com.
Edward Acosta
Olathe
This story was originally published September 30, 2014 at 5:10 PM with the headline "Readers share thoughts on government, Congress, shooting to kill."