LETTERS: Second Amendment a real life-saver

To the editor:

Michael Henderson’s letter to the editor opened with: “Road rage, two guns and a dead mother of four” (“Road rage and guns,” Feb. 27 Review-Journal). Then he asked, “To all you Second Amendment supporters, is this what you want?”

Maybe Brandy Moreno in Oklahoma City could answer that question by recounting the incident of a man breaking into her house at 4 a.m. and stabbing her. Her 11-year-old daughter retrieved a handgun and fired at the man, wounding him, which ultimately led to his apprehension. Or how about in Lancaster, Pa., where a man and his girlfriend in a car were confronted by two men, one with a gun, who demanded their possessions? The victim retrieved his handgun and the suspects fled.

I have reports of 41 cases just within the last few months in which having a weapon either saved a person’s life or the life of someone else. I do not have similar reports of any innocent, unarmed murder victims, but if they were alive, maybe they could provide Mr. Henderson with an answer about the value of the Second Amendment.

BOB GATEWOOD

HENDERSON

E-cigarette regulations

To the editor:

The editorial concerning e-cigarettes was completely misleading and certainly not based on factual information (“Stomp e-cigarette taxes,” Feb. 27 Review-Journal). Several discrepancies must be addressed.

First, the editorial stated that e-cigarettes are not tobacco products, but admitted that they utilize nicotine. Where does the author think nicotine comes from? Tobacco, which serves as just another delivery system for that highly addictive substance.

Second, the editorial states that vapor produced quickly disappears, seemingly assuming that makes it harmless. Scientific studies have shown vapor contains significant amounts of nicotine, as well as other toxic compounds, some of which are carcinogenic. I certainly don’t want to be inhaling those as second-hand toxins. According to the Centers for Disease Control, e-cigarette users, even if they have never used traditional tobacco products, exhibit diminished lung function, increased airway resistance and airway cellular changes.

Third, the major argument for the use of e-cigarettes is that they are used to help smokers quit smoking. There is no scientific evidence to back up that claim. Marketing flavors such as bubble gum, cherry and candy is more likely to attract young persons, getting them addicted to nicotine.

The World Health Organization issued a statement in 2014 suggesting that governments take steps to control e-cigarette use, including control over indoor use, regulating advertising to minors and banning sales to minors due to safety concerns. Apparently some members of the Legislature chose to place economic considerations ahead of consumer safety, as usual.

WALLACE J. HENKELMAN

HENDERSON

Charter school debate

To the editor:

The editorial admonishing Sun City MacDonald Ranch residents for their opposition to the proposed charter school will not encourage readership among the seniors who support the print media (“No good reason to oppose charter school,” Feb. 27 Review-Journal). The clever insertion in the editorial about the MacDonald Ranch golf course might influence public opinion, but it should be noted that the course is public and only a small percentage of residents are golfers — not elitists, as the editorial infers.

The Review-Journal should continue coverage of Henderson politics, which is more enjoyable to read.

LES BENAFIELD

HENDERSON