Would gun control have prevented Los Angeles shooting?
The Sun's editorial about the shooting at the Jewish Community Center in Los Angeles again called for more gun control laws ("More innocents, more gunfire, more pain," Aug. 12). Does The Sun really think that any gun control would have prevented Buford Furrow Jr. from carrying out his plan to kill Jews?
No law would have stopped this neo-Nazi from doing what he did -- no waiting period, background check, smart gun technology would have stopped him from shooting children. He is clearly a sociopath without regard for human life.
But he could have been delayed. He was on parole for second-degree assault, after only serving five months of his sentence. Had parole been abolished in Washington state, he would have been required to spend several years, not a few months, in prison.
How can we allow the justice system to place violent felons back on the streets of our cities to prey on people?
Why won't The Sun support abolishing parole for violent criminals (as Virginia has done)?
Why can't Baltimore City adopt a "zero tolerance" crime program, modeled after the one that has reduced crime significantly in New York City?
Why won't our legislators pass laws to crack down on violent, repeat offenders and get them off our streets for good?
Instead The Sun and our governor focus on non-existent, cost ineffective, so-called "smart-gun technology." Something is very wrong with this picture.
Sanford Abrams
Baltimore
The writer is vice president of the Maryland Licensed Firearms Dealers Association Inc.
The mass shooting at a California daycare center, an admitted hate crime perpetrated by a man with close ties to neo-Nazi organizations, once again provides a chilling reminder that the nation needs a strict federal weapons registration law.
The do-nothing Congress has caved in repeatedly to the National Rifle Association (NRA), which contributes heavily to its friends in the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate.
The NRA falls back on the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
But when the Bill of Rights was ratified more than 200 years ago, America was a vastly different nation than it is today.
On the threshold of the 21st century, we find ourselves in a violent and dangerous society where crime is rampant and guns are everywhere.
If it was put to a national referendum, is there any doubt that the American people would overwhelmingly support a tough gun law?
How many more people must lose their lives before Congress gets the message?
Albert E. Denny
Baltimore
Freedom should be revoked for those who practice hate
When personal freedom enables a person or a group of people to disseminate hatred or incite violence, and groups openly advocate hate on the Internet and people are allowed to demonstrate in neo-Nazi uniforms and display the swastika, then we need to deny those people the freedom to do these things.
When violent movies, TV shows, videos and computer games glorify war, killing and violence, it is time to deny them the freedom to so glorify violence.
When people are allowed to arm themselves and accumulate virtual arsenals of weapons, it's time to deny that freedom.
No one or no group should enjoy the freedom to threaten or endanger the lives of others. No one should have the freedom to attack anyone else because of their skin color, religious affiliation, ethnic background, sexual orientation, political views or for any other reason.
Freedom is wonderful when exercised properly. Anyone who abuses people does not deserve such a precious privilege.
The license of a drunken driver can be revoked. Why don't we revoke the freedom of hate groups?
I. F. Siegel
Baltimore
O'Malley's experience can help him fight crime
Crime is quickly becoming the central issue in the Baltimore mayoral campaign. Some in Baltimore are afraid of the effect "zero tolerance" policing would have on our streets.
Many see the policy as abusive and even racist. They argue that "zero tolerance" tramples rights and makes police departments tyrannical.
Some of the same people have characterized Councilman Martin O'Malley as hypocrite for promulgating a "get tough on crime" agenda, even as he has served as a private defense attorney.
But isn't it obvious that crime and quality of life issues in Baltimore must be addressed to prevent the surrounding counties from drowning under the refugees fleeing the city at a rate of 1,000 a month?
We have to get tough on crime. We have to improve life in the city.
Who better to lead the fight against crime than a former prosecutor and defense attorney? Having faced the dilemma from both sides of the fence is a strength for Mr. O'Malley, not a weakness.
Eric Webb
Baltimore
Henson's a scapegoat for Bell campaign's failings
The firing of City Council President Lawrence A. Bell's campaign organizer, Julius Henson, is another political ploy by Mr. Bell's camp ("Bell fires aide who organized rally disruption," Aug. 10).
Mr. Henson is being used as a scapegoat to reduce the negative fallout from the Bell supporters' disruption of Councilman Martin O'Malley's rally.
Lawrence Bell's brother, Marshall Bell, was present and actively participated in that disruption. Was he fired?
Are we to believe that he didn't inform his brother about the planned verbal assault on Del. Howard P. Rawlings, Sen. Barbara Hoffman and Sen. Joan Carter-Conway, three of the most influential members of Maryland's General Assembly?
If that's true, and Lawrence Bell doesn't know what goes on in his own campaign, imagine what shenanigans would transpire should he become mayor.
Mark Fosler
Baltimore
Character, not race, should win our votes
One thing was evident last week: Racism comes in all colors. In his endorsement of Carl Stokes for mayor, Sen. Nathaniel McFadden urged that a black person should be elected mayor -- never mind the quality of the candidate or his aptitude for the office.
If white citizens can vote for black ones, the reverse should be also true.
Vote for someone not because of his or her color but for the "content of his character," as Martin Luther King Jr. put it.
Richard L. Lelonek
Baltimore
Worst candidates ever for mayor?
The reputations, caliber and (sometimes criminal) records of our mayoral candidates are a total disgrace. In the 64 years I have lived in and around Baltimore, I have never witnessed such an abomination in local politics.
I pray this is only a local phenomenon and not a national trend.
William Scott
Baltimore
Comic strip's removal was itself a 'non-sequitur'
As an avid comics pages reader, I kept out of the "Boondocks" dialogue. I think that strip is racial, not racist.
But I also think that it's not funny -- I guess perhaps I'm too white to appreciate the biting social commentary it supposedly offers.
But I'm writing to express my disappointment with the removal of another strip, "Non Sequitur" by Wiley Miller.
I found it one of the funniest strips The Sun carried. Its dry, ironic humor was a great alternative to the lighter strips, most of which I still enjoy.
Dennis D. Ford
Linthicum
On what was the decision to eliminate the comic strip "Non Sequitur" based?
Whatever the reason, The Sun couldn't have picked a worse strip to get rid of. The genius of artist Wiley Miller is matched by very few in his field.
He helps us laugh at our personal foibles and those of society. And his insights, his style and the technical excellence of his art are simply wonderful.
The decision to eliminate the strip was itself a non sequitur.
Paul Umansky
Baltimore
To our readers
The Sun welcomes letters from readers. They should be no longer than 200 words and should include the name and address of the writer, along with day and evening telephone numbers.
Send letters to Letters to the Editor, The Sun, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore 21278-0001. Our fax number for letters is 410-332-6977. The e-mail address is letters@baltsun.com.
All letters are subject to editing.