To The Daily Sun,
We have read, seen many incidents involving violent gun encounters. There has been a cry for gun control, and a cry to keep the Second Amendment. This is a case where we can have our cake and eat it both.
The Second Amendment was designed during the early years of our country's history. During this period, guns were necessary to the survival as well as safety of the citizens. They were used to hunt as well as for defense.
History shows that, over time, law enforcement became stronger to providing defense of property and human life. Food became more available in markets reducing the need to hunt. Today, additional needs to have stringent gun control is mandatory, given the multiple gun incidents that have occurred.
There is a way to allow guns as per the Second Amendment and have effective gun control. This method is patterned after existing licensing system for automobiles and trucks. This will work to conserve both the Second Amendment and public safety.
First, stringent background checks is critical; and must be initiated before any license can be considered. If evidence indicates a mentally disturbed resident resides in a facility or home, there should be no guns in that place. (This could have prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy, or the movie theater disasters.) Those who are identified with terrorist organizations would also be refused guns (ie: shootings at military facilities).
Two, everyone should be required to have both training and a license for use of any gun. Like driver education, this should apply to guns as well. No exceptions. Two, licenses must be granted according to the type of weapon used. For example, training and a special license would be required to obtain an AK-7 weapon. License process will require formal training by licensed instructor, then the testing, oral, written, and hands on examination similar to a driver's license test.
This does not mean one cannot have a gun. It means you now need to go through the above process to obtain this license. If you do not fulfill the requirements, you cannot have a gun. Safety is the rationale behind this proposal, and conserves our right to health, safety, and welfare. The second amendment remains intact.
Robert T. Joseph, Jr.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 28 July 2015 08:48
To The Daily Sun,
This evening, Wednesday, July 29, from 7 to 8, supporters of Bernie Sanders's presidential campaign are organizing thousands of kick-off meetings all across the country. The nearest one for us will be at the Gilford Community Church Sanctuary at 19 Potter Hill Road in Gilford Village. Join us for the start of this grassroots campaign where we will begin a volunteer organization built on the notion that a representative democracy must be represented by the many.
This meeting will give you an opportunity to learn more about Senator Sanders and to plug into the various volunteer teams and groups that will carry this campaign forward. Our immediate task is to organize teams to spread the word and get the conversation rolling on the issues that are most important in making a just society — income equality, care for our environment, concern for our neighbors, and opportunities for all people to fulfill their potential.
Although the election is still over a year away, building the momentum starts now. Please consider joining us tonight at the Fellowship Hall if you are simply curious, want to learn more, or are interested in supporting Bernie Sanders.
Thank you and hope to see you tonight.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 28 July 2015 08:43
To The Daily Sun,
A non-public session of the Belknap County Commission was called to order just past ten o'clock on Monday, July 27th with all three County Commissioners present. Commissioner Taylor was appointed by Commissioner DeVoy to take minutes.
While Mr. DeVoy referenced an e-mail sent out on Sunday, July 26 by Mr. Taylor, he did not want that to initiate the discussion of the grievance filed by (nursing home) Director Logue. Since I found the body of the e-mail as well, as the attachment, to be very
prejudicial, I did want to discuss this before we turned to the formal request by Mr. Logue for a hearing of his grievance.
The e-mail itself refers to the word grievance in quotation marks, indicating from the very beginning that Mr. Taylor did not find the grievance of Mr. Logue credible. Mr. Taylor, in a letter which he worked up, apparently on his own, used the collective "we" which presumed the acquiescence of Mr. DeVoy in the avalanche of misleading statements which followed.
I pointed out to Mr. Taylor the prejudice implicit in this. His response was that I was prejudiced in favor of Mr. Logue. I stated that, as a member of the Personnel Committee of the Belknap Delegation, I along with Ms. Worsman and Mr. Greemore found (last year), by a preponderance of the evidence, that Mr. Logue was credible and that the county administrator had lied during her testimony. I further stated that the impasse in county government was the direct result of the failure of DeVoy and Taylor to properly direct, or to replace, the county administrator. I stated "jacta alea est": the die was cast when they failed to act on this difficult matter in February.
With no further discussion, Mr. Taylor made a motion, seconded by Mr. DeVoy, to send the aforementioned letter. I voted in the minority to not send the letter and objected to the premature end to the discussion. Mr. Taylor moved the question, which was seconded by Mr. DeVoy. They then voted to send the letter which had been concocted by Taylor on July 26 and quickly voted to adjourn, at which time Mr. Taylor verbally threw a common vulgarity my way as a way of saying, in effect, "take that".
The total time that we were in non-public session was less than 10 minutes. As I stated in February when told by Mr. DeVoy that he was a gentleman, I do not find that to be the case and equally find Mr. Taylor to be quite removed from that status.
Belknap County Commissioner
Last Updated on Monday, 27 July 2015 08:21
To The Daily Sun,
I read with interest Peter Morrissete's letter to Warren Hutchins in regard to the property he purchased, which was the former St. Helena Church. As in all things in life, there are many issues that seem to be festering between Mr. Morrissette the Planning Board and Zoning Board that I was not aware of that appear to have political overtones, at least in Mr. Morrissete's view. But I am not involved in such.
My wife and I happen to live directly adjacent the former church. When we bought our home we did not envision a "storage area" to be built on this property and I am quite sure if there was a storage area already in existence we would not have been interested in the property.
This letter is written to Mr. Morrissette and in essence to the Zoning Board because it reflects a view that seems to be lost in all the legalities of the issue at hand. Does anyone in their heart really think a storage area etc., would not affect the surrounding residential homes? Would Mr. Morrissette and any board members really consider buying a home next to a storage area? Of course, some may say they would. Well, I have lived in a major industrial city next to factories and other businesses and I can tell you that the nature of the community will definitely change.
If you want to actually see and feel the change, then just park your car near my property and watch the activity that presently surrounds the "empty church". Here is what I see: Various trucks parking to either check their rig or just stop, RV campers who stop for the day or the moment or even a few nights, new motorcyclist learning how to operate their newly bought bikes, car drivers leaving rubber i.e., for those who don't know what that means, revving their engines at high rates of speed while holding the brake and then letting it go to leave a patch of rubber on the tar, and there were times when I thought they might lose control of their vehicles and just come flying through the adjacent trees lining the lot, fireworks being lit at late hours, and if any major work is being done in the local area, paving trucks, cement trucks, etc., always park their rigs on the lot which I can understand. But there is always accompanying noise.
I should note that if there is a couple talking at about where the church stands, I can hear them talking from my house. I'm not complaining about that, I am just pointing out how sound carries their voices.
And that is the essence of my concerns. My issue isn't with Mr. Morrissette, it's with the future of what will happen if this variance is granted. I believe Mr. Morrissette presents some valid points when he says, "The funny part about wanting to store a few motorcycles or wave runners inside the former church is that if I build inside the former church is that if I build the 20 residential units there, the resident can all use the church building for storage or a community hall, with all of them going in and out, with nose and or a community party — whatever they want. And the neighbors have no say because that's okay."
Now, this statement, Mr. Morrissette is both true and false. Yes, it is true that if you build 20 residential units and a storage building that people in that community would be able to use it. But it is false in the sense that neighbors do have a say about the noise and use of any property owned in a community and the the level of noise that goes on in such a community. We have the same rights as you, Mr. Morrissette and I don't expect you would tolerate the very issues you pose if they were taking place next to your home.
So, Mr. Morrissette, go to the meeting, as you say, "ready to battle," in this country, so far, you have a right to do so.
But I would like to point out my wife and I, do not belong to the Pendleton Beach Association. I didn't even know Mr. Hutchinson until I attended the last Zoning Board meeting. My wife and I are just a hard-working couple who have worked hard for all of our life's and moved to Laconia to enjoy the beautiful area we live in. We don't know how the board will rule on your variance application and we harbor no ill feelings toward you. We are just posing our feelings and concerns about the future long-term use of the church property. We trust the board will view all of the public's concerns as it views your application.
Someone once said, "It isn't what people think that is important, but the reason they think what they think." I look at the law with the same view; the laws are giving to us as a rule to follow, they have a purpose, they are made to protect us. But it is the judges and board members who are appointed to interpret the laws for the greater good of the public. The letter of the law says if a man goes through a red light he gets a ticket, but the spirit of the law takes into consideration that if a man has a baby in the car who is dying then that man may be the exception to the rule. That is, by going through the light rather than stopping he has saved the baby's life, but he has broken the letter of the law. Who among us would hold him to the law? So, I'll trust the Zoning Board will do what is right as they interpret what is best for all in the context of the spirit of the law.
I have noticed that attorneys have a way of presenting the 'letter of the law' to judges and board members when they are representing a client, but when they represent themselves and the law goes against them, they wish to be treated within the spirit of the law. How much better would this world be if all were treated equally in terms of the spirit of the law.
Lastly, Mr. Morrissette, you say, "... I hope the neighbors from the Pendleton Beach Association like big orange snow fences because we're going to keep all the people and illegal parking out."
Well, as I previously stated, I don't belong to the Pendleton Beach Association so I won't speak for them, but I personally think pink would be more politically correct in going with the times. It isn't the color of the fence that is the heart of the matter, Mr. Morrissette, it is rather the hearts of all the individuals associated with the issue at hand. And since I will not be able to attend the next board meeting, I took time to write this letter hoping that all the parties concerned would take time to think about how this property would be used for future uses.
And, a bit of advice, Mr. Morrissette, I have learned over the years, the hard way, that when a man is angry he is seldom reasonable, but a reasonable man is seldom angry. Hopefully when you are at the next Zoning Board meeting you won't be talking about orange snow fences, but what is reasonable for both yourself and the community. I wish you well in your future endeavors.
Last Updated on Monday, 27 July 2015 05:34
To The Daily Sun,
Why does the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces and the leader of the free world seem to be of the opinion that the slaughter of four Marines and one Navy petty officer by a terrorist is not sufficient reason to fly the White House flag at half mast? John Kerry and Josh Earnest answered with a less-than-earnest "I dunno", in so many words.
Perhaps now that he has attended a Broadway play, attended a fundraiser and played a few rounds of golf since the tragedy, Mr. Obama could perhaps reflect on this needless slaughter caused by a man seemingly inspired by Allah to go kill in his name. No, it was only after the Capitol lowered the flag to half mast and the Republicans demanded that the president do the same at the White House many days later.
By now, everyone except our president and the left understand the pattern that has emerged. Here's a short trip down memory lane. The Christmas Day bomber was a "radical extremist." Four Benghazi deaths were about an unkind "Internet video". The murders at a kosher deli in Paris were "random acts of violence". Of course, who can forget Major Nidal Malik Hasan shooting 43 unarmed soldiers and killing 13 of them while shouting "Allahu Akbar". I believe the official narrative of that radical Islamic slaughter, after more than five years, remains "workplace violence". And let's not forget the Boston marathon mad bombers. The poor Tsarnaev brothers were just a couple of "lone wolves" who had lost their way. Baa, baa, baa.
I wrote a letter back in January of this year referencing Lt. Col. David Grossman, who wrote a book entitled, "On Combat". It talks about three categories of people — sheep, sheepdogs and wolves. Our brave service men and women go abroad to act like "sheepdogs" to defend us against the "wolves". Those wolves are now increasingly roaming our towns and cities, intent on devouring us and our freedoms. The Department of Defense has decreed that those sheepdogs should take off their uniforms while stateside and hide among we civilians (mostly sheep). So now we have civilians carrying legally owned firearms (sheepdogs) protecting our soldiers. Apparently, because this pacifist administration thinks our service men and women are not capable enough to defend themselves at home (they transform back into sheep).
Is this not "Alice Through the Looking Glass" madness? How does one describe a president who refuses to name the enemy that has reached our shores, repeatedly? Who refuses to address evil when it is staring him in the face? And please spare me the drivel that he is trying to defeat evil because Bin Laden was killed on his watch, because he likes to hit the drone button and sends a few pinprick air strikes over Syria, pretending he is actually trying to win the battle.
Muhammed Youssef Abdulazeez, the son of a Palestinian and an immigrant from Kuwait, had become a devout Muslim and apparently learned his Koran lessons well, especially the phrase from Qur'an 3:151: "We will put terror into the hearts of the infidels." The past 30 years of a failed immigration policy which has resulted in gangs, rapes, child molestation and drunk drivers has now caused the death of men of honor and along with upstanding civilians such as Kate Steinle.
As David S. Whitley reminds us about every Islamic, jihadist terror group, they all use Quranic texts to justify their killings. "They all do it in the name of Allah — al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas, Ansaru, Al-Badr, the Taliban, Al-Nusra, Hizb'allah, Abu Sayyaf, Boko Haram, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jemaah Islamiyah, The Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Liberation Front, , the Abudullah, Azzam Brigades".
Ann Coulter's book, "Adios America" spells out the insanity and destruction of an immigration system that has allowed this to happen. You can count on forthcoming books by Mark Levin, "Plunder and Deceit" and Dr. Michael Savage, "Government Zero" to spell out the details of what could well be the end of America due to the marriage of "progressivism and Islamism."
Our constitutional republic, as we have known it, is almost gone. Dennis Prager says that the leftist ideology of the past 100 years has been more effective than Christianity in shaping this nation. Unfortunately, it is an ideology that far too often embraces evil (Iran and Cuba most recently) and hates those who fight evil. Due to the proliferation of the progressive, leftist mindset in our culture, we are losing our innate ability for self-preservation. Is now not the time for conservatives to rise up and start a peaceful civil war against this ideology? Mark Levin thinks so and so do I. Will we elect a president who will allow that to take place?
Last Updated on Monday, 27 July 2015 05:30