Letters To The Editor

WASHINGTON STATE

I-676 based on propaganda, paranoia

That was a superb editorial by John Webster about Initiative 676 (“Junk this bad idea with a decisive ‘no’, Opinion, Oct. 12). He truly says it like it is! This is bad law of the worst kind.

I-676 is a fraud. It has nothing to do with child safety and is not a public health issue. It is a deceitful attempt at repressive gun control and eventual confiscation. This is the Trojan horse of the naive gun grabbers.

Mandatory safety courses, examinations and certification, along with the imposed fees, constitute a major impediment to our most basic right of self-defense, which includes the possession of handguns if desired. This right is guaranteed by both our state and federal constitutions.

One seldom mentioned fact is that signing an application for a permit to own a handgun also constitutes permission to release your medical information - a major invasion of privacy.

I-676 is based on propaganda, paranoia and lies. It will do nothing more than make criminals out of a great number of law-abiding citizens.

As a physician dedicated to the preservation of public health and safety, I urge you to vote no on I-676. Thomas M. Ryan, M.D. Spokane

I-676 tramples parents rights

Thank you for your timely editorial against Initiative 676.

Supporters of I-676 continue to mislead the public regarding the true content of this initiative. They insist their intentions are to “save one child.” It actually restricts the rights of law-abiding parents to teach their children under the age of 18 total gun safety in their own home. My children were taught gun safety at age 7 or 8 and have grown to be very conscious of the safe use of all guns.

Every educator knows that hands-on training is the best of all forms. I-676 will not allow this to happen. Please vote no on I-676 so we as parents can continue to educate our children on firearms safety at home. Merlin J. Jespersen Spokane

The duped can help put things right

Recently, a friend proudly said he saw a commercial about voting yes to a gun-child safety law. He said he had signed an initiative when leaving a store and this may be part of that action.

It didn’t take long for him to realize the mistake he’d made when I gave him the facts about Initiative 676. He was quite embarrassed, mad and honestly not sure of how to redeem himself.

Fortunately, laws aren’t passed just by signing initiatives. It’s too late for him to take back his signature. It must now go before the public for a vote.

I wonder how many other people were in a hurry, didn’t take the time to read the whole initiative and signed it without knowing they were signing away their constitutional rights? I thought it sounded good at first, but I read into the initiative and found it to be full of loopholes, that it had nothing related to child safety and was an indirect way of eliminating my rights of privacy and gun ownership.

Upset as my friend was, I assured him that to make up for his misguided deed, he should not only vote no on I-676 but should tell others to get out and vote. Just as these slick anti-firearms people got him to sign this initiative, they already have slick commercials to fool the rest of the population.

Education is the key, but action by voting no on I-676 will ensure we retain our rights. M. Joe Jennings Deer Park

I-676 is so thoroughly wrong

I’m not sure how many thousands of people in this state don’t have the facts on Initiative 676 but they should.

It’s touted as a law to save children through the use of trigger locks. The truth is that Washington state has the lowest accidental death rate from handguns in the country.

The biggest issues about this initiative that bother me are the right to privacy, self-protection, property rights, parental rights and overall constitutional rights.

I-676 forces all gun owners to surrender the confidentiality of their medical records. Just owning a handgun without a government license will become a crime. Did I miss something in the Second Amendment?

Did you ever consider teaching your child safety involving guns? This would be subject to prosecution, merely for allowing them to handle a handgun in your own home.

Under the provisions of I-676 many will have to take a government test, undergo hours of government-approved instruction, travel to a state Department of Licenseapproved location to do the above, and wait for the Department of Licensing to finally approve the license. With millions of gun owners, you could wait a year or more to lawfully keep property you and your family legally and rightfully own today.

The bottom line is that I-676 does nothing to address the real problem of criminal use of guns. We don’t need to make criminals out of law-abiding citizens. Existing statues already prohibit possession of guns by juveniles and criminals. B.T. Fenn Spokane

Teach gun safety early, sensibly

A fundamental concept is being ignored by the creators of this very ill-conceived piece of potential legislation, Initiative 676.

I have formed the opinion that the drafters know very little about firearms and less about safety. Safety is not a lock, it is not a law. Safety is an attitude - an attitude that is patiently and painstakingly inculcated in the minds of children (and others) by persons (parents, teachers) who are concerned with the children’s welfare.

I was taught in school about firearms safety. We had a course in the third grade called riflery (for boys only). The school had a range in the basement and we shot for National Rifle Association qualifications. These were presented at assemblies. To the best of my knowledge, not one of my classmates ever shot themselves or a playmate, by accident or design, or held up a convenience store, or committed a drive-by shooting.

I can’t believe we’ve lost so much in so little time. Today’s schools are supposedly gun-free. Ha!. Perhaps the emphasis should be on instruction, not prohibition. Loue A. Stockwell Spokane

Some anti-I-676 rhetoric misleading

In a recent article on Initiative 676, it was stated that all handgun owners would have to take a course and pass a test to obtain a handgun safety license.

The law uses the conjunction “or.” One must take a course or test, or, in the case of those deemed to have received sufficient gun safety training in law enforcement and the military, be exempt.

The article also stated that medical records would be opened. Currently, if one signs an application to purchase a pistol, this constitutes a waiver of confidentiality (Sec. 19 and 20 of current law). This is the law today and there is no change, except to include the wording, “or to obtain a handgun safety license.”

The article also implied that failure to comply would result in a felony. “A person who knowingly violates … this act is guilty of a Class 2 civil infraction upon being found to have committed a first offense, of a misdemeanor upon conviction of a second offense and of a Class C felony upon conviction of any subsequent offense.”

Some dialogue on this initiative has expressed concern about the possibility of a gun firing while a trigger lock is being applied. Smith & Wesson, which is selling all its currently manufactured handguns with trigger locks, warns not to apply them to a loaded gun. Anyone doing so needs the safety course to become educated about this problem. A trigger lock’s primary use is for storage. If one feels they must store their gun loaded, they may wish to purchase a lock box or gun safe, which are also acceptable substitutes for a trigger lock.

There is one thing upon which I think we can all agree: Please read the initiative and become an educated voter. Pamela C. Behring Spokane

Everyone, read I-676 and think

Legal gun owners, myself included, feel that any death of a child is a tragedy, no matter what the cause.

It’s disturbing to know that the people backing Initiative 676 are trying to pass it off as just a requirement for the law-abiding gun owner to complete a mandatory training course and have trigger locks installed on handguns.

People need to realize that even with a trigger lock installed, a handgun may still be fired. This has been proven. Warning labels printed on trigger lock packaging state this.

On the issue of a training course, everything a person needs to know to safely operate and handle a firearm can be acquired at a state-certified hunter education course, provided as a public service. Why have another mandatory safety course?

I urge all voters to read the small print of this initiative and understand the implications before you vote. Todd A. Halvorson Spokane

THE ENVIRONMENT

Global warming shouldn’t be ignored

On Oct. 6, President Clinton and Vice President Gore met all day with more than 200 scientists, economists and educators at Georgetown University to discuss global warming. This made news in many major media outlets, but nary a mention in The Spokesman-Review.

As of Sept. 29, 7,921 scientists and economists, worldwide, have signed statements in support of the United States taking action - now. Major points are:

Global warming is here.

The consequences have been described as devastating, disastrous, extremely dangerous, catastrophic.

More floods, heat waves, droughts, hurricanes, tropical disease and ecosystem extinctions.

Global food production will be reduced.

The effects are long term; it will take the ocean up to 1,000 years to recover from warmer atmospheric temperatures.

Economic and energy use studies say U.S. actions to minimize global warming can benefit our economy.

A recent poll found that two-thirds of 800 people polled consider global warming “very serious” or “somewhat serious,” and 72 percent favored an international treaty to reduce 1990 greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2005, while only 9 percent would oppose it.

In December, 170 nations will meet in Japan to sign binding agreements on the production of their greenhouse gases. Tentatively, the United States will announce it’s position at Bonn, Germany, on Oct. 20.

Clinton needs to be told to reduce U.S. greenhouse emissions significantly. K. Julian Powers Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

System punishes senior citizen workers

Congressional leaders are proposing several strategies which will supposedly result in fairness in the U.S. tax code. None of them address the unfair collection of Social Security and Medicare taxes from retired folks who are still working.

My wife and I receive the monthly Social Security allotment based on my pre-retirement earnings. When we work, employers are required to deduct the standard Social Security tax from our wages and also contribute the employer portion for our earnings. There is no adjustment to our monthly benefit for the increase in funds accruing to my Social Security account. Therefore, we actually repay part of the allotment we receive without any benefit to us.

The employer is also required to deduct for Medicare. Again, we are not receiving benefit of these payments since we pay the same premium all other beneficiaries pay. In effect, every working elderly retiree is paying a higher premium than others.

If taxable income exceeds deductions, we also pay income tax on these withheld taxes.

Retired folks who receive Social Security benefits or are covered by Medicare should not be subject to these unfair taxes. William H. Allison Medical Lake

Take away officials’ saleable favors

You remember the ad. A sad-eyed woman bemoans the fact that Congressman (fill in the blank) favors the starving of innocent children and all sorts of other unspeakables so that his/her fat cat friends can have a tax cut. If we disapprove, we’re instructed to call the congressman and express our outrage.

This type of ad aired all over the country before the last election. Same actors. Same scripts. Same lies. Only the name was changed to fit the congressional district.

This time, big labor was the sponsor, but the tradition of lying about one’s opponent knows no ideological boundaries.

Now we have the spectacle of politicians who’ve never obeyed the spirit of campaign reform in their lives assuring us with pious faces that they would have absolutely obeyed (cross my fingers and hope to die) the reform scheme that just bit the dust.

PACs, voter education, hard money, soft money, milk money, coffees and teas. There are a million ways to beat the rules and we’re all appalled - when the other side does it.

Truth is, people will always act in their own interest. If you want special interests to stop buying favors from politicians, stop giving politicians favors to sell! Give us a flat tax with no deductions. Make it unconstitutional for government to give tax exemptions or subsidies to private parties or organizations. Abolish affirmative action and all other forms of government discrimination.

Special interest money and abuses will vanish when there’s nothing to buy. L. Jim Shamp Cheney

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

Know your neighbors - and care

The Oct. 3 article, “2-year-old dies while family slowly starves,” stirred several emotions.

The four surviving family members suffer from malnutrition but live in an immaculate apartment in a good neighborhood. Were unemployment and debt the culprits here?

I feel deep sadness for an innocent child, now gone. Sadness for a society where this family’s values had become so warped that status and material possessions took precedence over the basic survival needs, like food.

Anger emerged as I contemplated the apathy of our country’s politicians to honestly confront the issue of poverty. I am not talking about welfare. How many families are living in poverty? Is a person’s worth based on self-sufficiency?

Are there families in the Inland Northwest who present an impression of stability, like this family, while they are actually starving? Would you know if your neighbor were? The article instilled in me the need to promote good old-fashioned caring in our neighborhoods, schools and communities.

Do you know your neighbor? Have we become a society of isolated and insulated individuals who are indifferent to the needs of others in our environment? Are we regressing to a survival of the fittest mindset and lifestyle?

Police investigating the death indicated their shock and disbelief that this happened in the United States. Maybe in our progressive, capitalistic, highly technical society it is easier to act shocked and blame the parents of this child. Is it really an isolated incident, or a reflection of the pressures created in our society? Linda M. Burch St. Maries, Idaho

Hiding things no way to help young

I feel that there is only one thing to say about the “adult content” warning on “Ellen.” Sick.

It is strikingly odd that they use the same warning on “NYPD Blue,” which shows nearly full nudity, as for two people kissing. This is more than obviously just a prejudicial effort to hide homosexuality.

But if ABC or any other media network thinks that by hiding it it will go away, they’re dead wrong. I’m only 15 years old and realize there is a lot that I haven’t seen or experienced, but that hiding those things, which, by some self-righteous standard one clique of people deems perverted or wrong, doesn’t seem like it will help prepare me or any other youth for the future. And isn’t it, in fact, society’s main focus towards youth to educate and prepare them for the world? So, then, wouldn’t hiding parts of that world (which homosexuality is) hinder their education and preparation?

This isn’t a matter of right or wrong, but for that matter who are we, or you, or anyone else to dictate someone else’s lifestlye. This is America, “land of the free.” Let’s keep it that way.

Living in hate and harassment every single day doesn’t seem like freedom to me. It was a kiss. A simple kiss. Jared A. Rodgers Post Falls