Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.

 

Would you feel better if Esteban Santiago had used gasoline?

To The Daily Sun,

While I can appreciate the passion in Alan Vervaeke's column of Jan. 24, "Someone to blame for Ft. Lauderdale," he identified the culprit in the fifth paragraph: Esteban Santiago. He is the one who pulled the trigger.

The rest of the piece blames the object that Santiago used. Would Mr. Vervaeke have felt better if Esteban had murdered people with gasoline like at the Bronx nightclub in 1990?

While I don't want to take the space to refute his column point by point, there were two significant pieces missing from his column.

First, what do the massacres at Fort Lauderdale, Aurora, and Newtown have in common? They were gun-free zones that were chosen because there was little to no chance that potential victims could fight back. The murderers were the only ones with guns until the authorities (with guns) arrived.

Second, the FBI has testified that Santiago murdered those people on behalf of ISIS. That would suggest that he would have found a way to murder with or without his own pistol.

In closing, what if it was suggested that a right cherished by the left, say the right to free press, was to be infringed in such a manner? I think we know the answer to that.

Rick Notkin
Gilford

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 272

Year-Round Library board now stuck with results of own survey

To The Daily Sun,

It intrigues me how someone can begin a letter with, "we would like to correct some information," and then, after writing 632 words ... they end up correcting nothing at all. Such was the case with a recent letter of Jan. 18, which was intended, I'm guessing, to cushion the impact of what I had discovered and written on regarding the results of last year's long-awaited Gilmanton Year Round Library survey.

Apparently, the letter-writer felt it was enough simply to suggest that she was going to correct "misinformation," but didn't really feel the need to specifically correct anything. Or, maybe, she just couldn't.

My letter of Jan. 2, based solely on that survey, had specific page and statistic references for all of my conclusions. Hers did not. In fact, she never once, in those 632 words, even mentions any of the survey's relevant statistics. She instead creates her own set of statistics. How convenient. Her statistics, however, simply do not align with the UNH survey, which was the main focus of my letter. Statistics are, after all, what they are: numerical samples which, by design, are intended to represent a general whole, or consensus.

As a whole, then, the UNH survey shows the general consensus to be that the majority of the GYRL survey respondents were not, in multiple ways, favorable or supportive of the Year Round Library. Specifically, to its being operated on the backs of taxpayers who were never given a vested interest in the library in the first place, and who were allowed to believe, during fundraising, that town taxes would never be involved. I, in my letter, did not create this consensus. The statistics did. If the letter-writer, or the board she speaks for, or anyone for that matter, wants to attack this consensus, which is based entirely on the survey, they must first start with the UNH survey itself.

In my opinion, the GYRL board of directors, in throwing good money away on this survey, made yet another error in judgment. That error being, that now they are stuck with results which, were they truly in touch with their community, they should have anticipated and avoided. Worse, they are now faced with putting an impossibly positive spin on the fact that they never released any information of that survey to the general public in the first place. That in itself speaks volumes.

When I first discovered it, it suggested to me they had something to hide. Well, indeed they do. The undeniable fact is, that even the staunchest of GYRL supporters cannot deny that if the survey had shined favorably on the GYRL, Gilmanton would have woken up the morning after the results were "publicly" released to a front-page article, or a press release, or at least a letter. It did not!

And that, whether the GYRL board of directors or the letter-writer of Jan. 18 want to admit it, or not ... says it all.

Al Blake
Gilmanton

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 545