If a sniper can’t defend himself, no one can
To the editor:
Gun advocates constantly use self-defense as a justification for gun proliferation in America. Arming teachers has been discussed. Having armed security on school grounds, arming airplane pilots, as well as individuals buying guns for self-protection have all been suggested in the gun debate.
Throughout history, there have been very few instances in America where people have been able to use guns to bring down individual or mass killers, but it makes for a good talking point.
Chris Kyle and a friend were shot to death at a gun range in Texas recently. Mr. Kyle was a decorated Iraq war veteran and the deadliest military sniper in U.S. history. He was at the range with a friend when a deranged gunman killed them. The gunman then reportedly fled in a truck owned by one of the victims. He was apprehended after a short chase.
This case exemplifies the ridiculous self-defense argument. Neither Mr. Kyle nor anyone else at the shooting facility could prevent one armed psychopath from committing mayhem.
If one of the deadliest military veterans in U.S. history couldn’t protect himself against gun violence, at a facility where everyone was armed, what are the chances that the common man can defend himself or herself against these armed lunatics?
SANDRA MARY SMITH
LAS VEGAS
Ponzi scheme
To the editor:
Patricia Sears’ Saturday letter states, “Social Security wouldn’t be bankrupt if the government had kept its sticky fingers out of the fund.” Like many, Ms. Sears is unaware that many experts agree Social Security operates like a Ponzi scheme.
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent contribution scam promising high rates of return with little risk to contributors. The Ponzi scheme generates returns for older contributors by acquiring new contributors. This scam actually yields the promised returns to earlier contributors, as long as there are more new contributors. These schemes usually collapse on themselves when the number of new contributors declines.
We have now reached the point where there are fewer new contributors paying into Social Security, due to higher unemployment. Meanwhile, there are an increasing number of recipients drawing more returns from the fund because of the retirements of the baby boomers.
Ms. Sears should realize that, eventually, Social Security would go bankrupt even if the government hadn’t raided the fund, because it’s like a Ponzi scheme. And because the government has raided the fund, it will go bankrupt sooner.
FRANK M. PELTESON
LAS VEGAS
Road trip
To the editor:
Well, I see Santa Claus came to town last week, spreading cheer and good will. My question is, why would President Barack Obama visit Las Vegas?
The election is over. He won. Why is he still campaigning? For those people who still have a job and are paying their share of taxes, this trip cost you $1.6 million.
We don’t have a spending problem? Give me a break. For a person concerned about global warming, President Obama is not setting a very good example. This is the same president who suggested that people not come to Las Vegas and spend money.
How about this: Stay in Washington and give a speech in the Rose Garden. It’s much cheaper.
C. JACKSON
LAS VEGAS
Hillary’s statement
To the editor:
I read and watched with interest the Senate questioning of outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her statement concerning the deaths of Christopher Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty and Sean Smith in Benghazi. She did not say “What difference does it make?”
The conservative media, including the Review-Journal, made it sound like she just didn’t give a damn.
Has reporting become so biased that the media must perpetrate lies just to get more viewers or sell more newspapers? How come Congress and the media don’t show the same regard for the tens of thousands of men and women killed, wounded and who have committed suicide as a result of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Maybe, in their eyes, “What difference does it make?”
STEPHEN L. ROSIN
LAS VEGAS
It’s not about guns
To the editor:
Gun ownership isn’t about hunting. It’s about our Second Amendment right to defend ourselves if threatened and to preserve our independence.
The escalating violence in this country is directly related to the steep decline in morality, personal responsibility and regard for human life. Not to mention the amount of drugs that are used – prescription and otherwise.
How can we be so reactive to senseless and brutal shootings, but ignore the fact that Planned Parenthood performed more than 300,000 abortions last year?
Are some lives more sacred than others, or is it just a matter of political convenience? Guns protect the president’s family. Is his family more important than mine?
After enacting some of the strictest gun laws in the world, England has seen crime with handguns double, according to British government reports. Although gun crime wasn’t a serious problem in the past, armed street gangs now have some British police carrying guns for the first time. Why? The proposed gun control laws don’t apply to criminals who don’t buy their guns legally.
They will strip law-abiding citizens of their right to bear arms, making them vulnerable not only to more crime, but to tyranny. Anti-gun advocates and politicians will spin this as an effort in “gun safety” when it’s actually an effort in gun confiscation.
Speak now or you will lose that right, too.
RICK CRAIN
MESQUITE
