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must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.


Obama didn't say how his plan would have prevented any past shootings

To The Daily Sun,
President Obama deserves an Oscar for his performance in his "Common Sense Gun Safety" production. He said the right things, sounded sincere and caring, and teared up appropriately.

Unfortunately his gun control proposals fail to address the overwhelming majority of gun violence: criminals, gangs, and terrorists. His proposals will primarily make legal gun ownership and protection of innocent people more difficult.

President Obama says, "We know that we can't stop every act of violence. But what if we tried to stop even one?"

He could enforce our existing immigration laws and prevent the 400-500 killings and hundreds of thousands of rapes, robberies, muggings, other crimes and harmful accidents committed by illegal aliens annually. He could end sanctuary cities. But, President Obama isn't enforcing these laws and has been releasing, not deporting, violent criminal illegal aliens. President Obama isn't interested in saving the lives taken by illegal aliens.

Did President Obama propose increasing the punishments for criminal usage of guns, stricter law enforcement to keep violent gang members and criminals locked up, or more effective anti-drug efforts since a large percent of gun violence is drug related? No.

Almost all public mass shootings have been in "gun free zones." Did President Obama propose ending "gun free zones" to take the bulls-eyes off defenseless children in their schools and allow people to try to defend themselves from criminals or terrorists? No. Did President Obama propose withholding the names of mass killers to deprive them of the notoriety they crave? No.

President Obama proposed some restrictions on gun ownership by mentally ill people, but those restrictions may cost more lives than they save. Many mass murderers were taking psychiatric drugs, but most people taking those drugs don't commit crimes. And, President Obama's proposals go far beyond restricting the rights of violent mentally ill people, to restricting the rights of millions of the elderly, former soldiers, and others who don't threaten anyone.

President Obama didn't say how his proposals would have prevented any past crimes. Since his proposals didn't address the sources of almost all gun violence, despite his theatrics it seems his proposals aren't intended to reduce gun violence. His proposals seem designed to fail because failure can be used as justification for further gun controls. The more important goal of leftists like President Obama is to disarm all law abiding citizens, not to save innocent lives.

President Obama's speech and proposals disappointed knowledgeable people who actually want reduced gun violence and innocent lives saved. His use of murdered children as props to further the leftists' goal of eliminating Americans' Second Amendment rights is shameful, and President Obama should be condemned for it.

Don Ewing

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 371

Arbitrary & unfair overreach of big government on display in Oregon

To The Daily Sun,

In Oregon, armed militiamen have overtaken federal land. Those who only read headlines, now this. They may even be aware of the "is it terrorism/what if they were black" debate. But the real story we need to discuss is the protest's inspiration. The ranchers, especially Steve and Dwight Hammond.

Convicted of setting a fire on private land (with the intent of killing an invasive species) that spread to federal land. Now the attorney general has forced them return to prison, years after their release. Further investigation reveals the arbitrary nature of this action. It reveals a history of harassment by the federal government, whose acquisition of private land around a federal wildlife refuge was resisted by local ranchers.

In the 1980s the harassment was diverting water to the area, flooding those properties. The 1990s featured unexplained revocations of grazing licenses and the blockage of roads. Now the federal government incarcerates citizens, even as it commits the same actions (in reverse) causing private property damage and the death of livestock, but no federal officers ever face charges.

Arbitrary and unfair overreach is the consequence of a big government, and that is just cause for protest, armed or not.

Ryan Smith

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 368