Imagine a world where everybody carries an assault rifle with them
To the editor,
Let me start by saying the same thing I started with the last time: "I am not an expert and never claimed to 'know it all' about anything. My views may change as I learn more about anything or anyone. I love to learn new things. But here are my "suggestions" for gun control after the tragedy in CT.."
It must have been my imagination but I thought I saw a "gun enthusiast" from Newtown, CT. on NECN this morning (Jan. 17) complaining that he has "the right to own an automatic assault rifle to protect my family". From my understanding (please correct me as I am always wrong about everything), an automatic assault rifle is designed for long distance "warfare". That means an automatic assault rifle was designed to hold or protect an army, people or location. It may have been useful in close combat but was never intended to protect a family at home from a few "intruders" when a hand gun is more than enough fire power until the police get there. You can really "mess up " a burgular's night with six shots and the police on their way.
Perhaps another issue is the estimated time of arrival of law enforcement. Should families who live in a rural or country setting with a police E.T.A. at 10 minutes or more be allowed more "firepower"? By all means, yes! But in a town or city where the police E.T.A. is under 10 minutes, perhaps one hand gun and two magazines is enough? We pay our taxes for protection which includes the police and fire departments. The police are trained and paid for our protection. Maybe we need more police and a faster response time? That makes more sense to me that allowing anyone to own an automatic assault rifle. Although an owner of an automatic assault rifle may be an upstanding member of the community who is to say their mental health may change, a family member may gain access or their home be broken into and weapons stolen?
Perhaps police could be allowed to keep an automatic assualt rifle as personal property? But the idea I heard on the "new gun laws" was that any person could buy a gun but be limited to only one gun per month? "Why the hell would anyone need to 'collect' or buy a gun per month"? Nobody needs to buy a gun every month unless they exchange their old gun each time. Everyone should have the right to protect themselves and their falmilies and home. Two hand guns and two clips per adult, per household is more than enough. Only four hand guns per household reguardless on how many adults in the home. If you think you need a machine gun to protect yourself against our government, Japan, aliens or zombies that will attack you and your family you need to spend your money on your mental health not weapons.
People who seem too preoccupied with dying prematurely need to wear seatbelts and stop smoking and drinking. Once you reach 50 years old it is your children's job to protect you. You are gonna die, some day, some place and all the guns you buy will not stop the day from coming. Everyone is worried about protecting themselves too much! The end is coming for us all one way or another. The police are here and maybe we need more police to improve the response time which will increase your taxes. Wouldn't that be better than giving all your neighbors an automatic assault rifle? Can you imagine what the world would be like if everyone owned an automatic assault rifle? If you think everyone should have an automatic assault rifle then everyone would need to carry one everywhere they go. Could you imagine America where every adult carried an automatic assault rifle? Duh? Wouldn't that be the perfect world? Ugh! THAT SUCKS!
Joe Laurendeau
Gilmanton
Let me start by saying the same thing I started with the last time: "I am not an expert and never claimed to 'know it all' about anything. My views may change as I learn more about anything or anyone. I love to learn new things. But here are my "suggestions" for gun control after the tragedy in CT.."
It must have been my imagination but I thought I saw a "gun enthusiast" from Newtown, CT. on NECN this morning (Jan. 17) complaining that he has "the right to own an automatic assault rifle to protect my family". From my understanding (please correct me as I am always wrong about everything), an automatic assault rifle is designed for long distance "warfare". That means an automatic assault rifle was designed to hold or protect an army, people or location. It may have been useful in close combat but was never intended to protect a family at home from a few "intruders" when a hand gun is more than enough fire power until the police get there. You can really "mess up " a burgular's night with six shots and the police on their way.
Perhaps another issue is the estimated time of arrival of law enforcement. Should families who live in a rural or country setting with a police E.T.A. at 10 minutes or more be allowed more "firepower"? By all means, yes! But in a town or city where the police E.T.A. is under 10 minutes, perhaps one hand gun and two magazines is enough? We pay our taxes for protection which includes the police and fire departments. The police are trained and paid for our protection. Maybe we need more police and a faster response time? That makes more sense to me that allowing anyone to own an automatic assault rifle. Although an owner of an automatic assault rifle may be an upstanding member of the community who is to say their mental health may change, a family member may gain access or their home be broken into and weapons stolen?
Perhaps police could be allowed to keep an automatic assualt rifle as personal property? But the idea I heard on the "new gun laws" was that any person could buy a gun but be limited to only one gun per month? "Why the hell would anyone need to 'collect' or buy a gun per month"? Nobody needs to buy a gun every month unless they exchange their old gun each time. Everyone should have the right to protect themselves and their falmilies and home. Two hand guns and two clips per adult, per household is more than enough. Only four hand guns per household reguardless on how many adults in the home. If you think you need a machine gun to protect yourself against our government, Japan, aliens or zombies that will attack you and your family you need to spend your money on your mental health not weapons.
People who seem too preoccupied with dying prematurely need to wear seatbelts and stop smoking and drinking. Once you reach 50 years old it is your children's job to protect you. You are gonna die, some day, some place and all the guns you buy will not stop the day from coming. Everyone is worried about protecting themselves too much! The end is coming for us all one way or another. The police are here and maybe we need more police to improve the response time which will increase your taxes. Wouldn't that be better than giving all your neighbors an automatic assault rifle? Can you imagine what the world would be like if everyone owned an automatic assault rifle? If you think everyone should have an automatic assault rifle then everyone would need to carry one everywhere they go. Could you imagine America where every adult carried an automatic assault rifle? Duh? Wouldn't that be the perfect world? Ugh! THAT SUCKS!
Joe Laurendeau
Gilmanton
Last Updated on Friday, 18 January 2013 01:42
Hits: 75
This is not about politics, but about truth & character. Period.
To the editor,
Mr. Earle's most recent letter goes from the sublime to the ridiculous. He begins by making light of my reaction to his slanderous lies, in which he makes unsubstantiated accusations, attributed to me, with the intent to purposely undermine my integrity and call my character into question. He rationalizes his falsehoods by stating that I may not have made these statements, but "lumped" me in with a few other "leftists" who make these "claims". Then he states, "Maybe not, but he damn sure said some of the others ..." — what others? If we are to believe Earle's warped sense of logic, are we to accept, based on Earle's conservative views, that all conservatives contributing to this forum are prevaricators?
Rather than having a "meltdown" as he asserts, I find his attacks on me humorous and losing touch with reality. He whines about me calling his character and credibility into question, but has no qualms about maliciously misrepresenting my views.
Earle, in his tunnel vision, fails to see that this is not about politics, but about TRUTH and CHARACTER.
I'm sure that the correspondence between Earle and myself has provided readers of this forum with comic relief, but I agree with Mr. Baldwin — enough is enough! Earle may want to carry on, but this is my last letter in reference to this subject.
L. J. Siden
Gilmanton
Mr. Earle's most recent letter goes from the sublime to the ridiculous. He begins by making light of my reaction to his slanderous lies, in which he makes unsubstantiated accusations, attributed to me, with the intent to purposely undermine my integrity and call my character into question. He rationalizes his falsehoods by stating that I may not have made these statements, but "lumped" me in with a few other "leftists" who make these "claims". Then he states, "Maybe not, but he damn sure said some of the others ..." — what others? If we are to believe Earle's warped sense of logic, are we to accept, based on Earle's conservative views, that all conservatives contributing to this forum are prevaricators?
Rather than having a "meltdown" as he asserts, I find his attacks on me humorous and losing touch with reality. He whines about me calling his character and credibility into question, but has no qualms about maliciously misrepresenting my views.
Earle, in his tunnel vision, fails to see that this is not about politics, but about TRUTH and CHARACTER.
I'm sure that the correspondence between Earle and myself has provided readers of this forum with comic relief, but I agree with Mr. Baldwin — enough is enough! Earle may want to carry on, but this is my last letter in reference to this subject.
L. J. Siden
Gilmanton
Last Updated on Friday, 18 January 2013 01:36
Hits: 140
Granting raises to county employees will boost local economy
To the editor,
The article about the county budget in Tuesday's Laconia Sun paired well with the letter by Curt McGee in the same issue. The "problems" seem to be the proposed increase of 8.9 percent in the 2013 county property tax and the authority of the County Commission over specific line items in the budget.
Reneging on the three percent merit raises for eligible county employees would not solve the unacceptable increase in the property tax. But granting the $95,000 in raises that we are talking about here would actually help those employees while boosting the local economy. The employees who received those raises would surely be spending that money here. As we know, the spending we all do in the community, buying goods and services, gets magnified in the local economy.
Using more of the fund balance, as Mr. McGee suggests, would have the desired effect of lowering the proposed county tax so that there would be little or no increase over last year's rate. The debate would properly center around how much of the fund balance to use to lessen the impact on the tax rate. Property tax problem solved? I think not.
So what is the real "problem" here? To me, an outsider, it appears that some members of the County Convention want to exert their political power over the County Commission at the expense of the deserving county employees, regardless of whether that would solve the property tax issue or not. It won't.
Anne Rogers
Meredith
The article about the county budget in Tuesday's Laconia Sun paired well with the letter by Curt McGee in the same issue. The "problems" seem to be the proposed increase of 8.9 percent in the 2013 county property tax and the authority of the County Commission over specific line items in the budget.
Reneging on the three percent merit raises for eligible county employees would not solve the unacceptable increase in the property tax. But granting the $95,000 in raises that we are talking about here would actually help those employees while boosting the local economy. The employees who received those raises would surely be spending that money here. As we know, the spending we all do in the community, buying goods and services, gets magnified in the local economy.
Using more of the fund balance, as Mr. McGee suggests, would have the desired effect of lowering the proposed county tax so that there would be little or no increase over last year's rate. The debate would properly center around how much of the fund balance to use to lessen the impact on the tax rate. Property tax problem solved? I think not.
So what is the real "problem" here? To me, an outsider, it appears that some members of the County Convention want to exert their political power over the County Commission at the expense of the deserving county employees, regardless of whether that would solve the property tax issue or not. It won't.
Anne Rogers
Meredith
Last Updated on Friday, 18 January 2013 01:34
Hits: 127
Stop giving money to other countries & take care of Americans
To the editor,
Can someone explain to me why President Obama is saying we MUST raise HIS spending cap so we can pay our dictatorships bills? And Mr. President is unwilling to negotiate that issue with Congress! Yet President Obama continues to allow farm subsidies to be paid to millionaires every year. And President Obama allows oil companies to make billions of profit each year but many pay NO taxes? And the auto industry that collected billions of dollars in taxpayers money to avoid failure get special treatment on their taxes? President Obama says if the spending cap is NOT raised then things like Medicaid, Social Security, military paychecks wlll be withheld as well as other government programs! Will Congress not get their paychecks?
Then I read of Sen. John McCain on a committee that is trying to find a way to provide "New Aid to Cairo", Egypt to the tune of $480 MILLION additional funds. Now this money is to go to Egypt President Mohamed MORSI who once was a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood that is a very anti-Israel and anti-United States group. Newspaper articles say Morsi told Egyptians they should nurse their children on the "hatred for them, for Zionists, for Jews. They must be breast fed hatred". MORSI said the Zionists were PIGS and BLOODSUCKERS. Morsi also called President OBAMA of the U.S. of America a LIAR. Then low and behold he becomes president of Egypt and now the Taxpayers of America are sending him money! Remember how the U.S. supported Osama bin Laden with money and weapons before he turned on U.S. and destroyed Thousands of People in his attack on the Twin Towers and other fatal attacks around the world?
When will the PEOPLE be able to elect lawmakers who will stop worrying so much about giving money to other COUNTRIES before taking care of AMERICA and American taxpayers? It seems to be IMPOSSIBLE! Imagine what $480 MILLION DOLLARS they want to send to Egypt will do to help people of the United States of America!
Jim Martel
Gilford
Can someone explain to me why President Obama is saying we MUST raise HIS spending cap so we can pay our dictatorships bills? And Mr. President is unwilling to negotiate that issue with Congress! Yet President Obama continues to allow farm subsidies to be paid to millionaires every year. And President Obama allows oil companies to make billions of profit each year but many pay NO taxes? And the auto industry that collected billions of dollars in taxpayers money to avoid failure get special treatment on their taxes? President Obama says if the spending cap is NOT raised then things like Medicaid, Social Security, military paychecks wlll be withheld as well as other government programs! Will Congress not get their paychecks?
Then I read of Sen. John McCain on a committee that is trying to find a way to provide "New Aid to Cairo", Egypt to the tune of $480 MILLION additional funds. Now this money is to go to Egypt President Mohamed MORSI who once was a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood that is a very anti-Israel and anti-United States group. Newspaper articles say Morsi told Egyptians they should nurse their children on the "hatred for them, for Zionists, for Jews. They must be breast fed hatred". MORSI said the Zionists were PIGS and BLOODSUCKERS. Morsi also called President OBAMA of the U.S. of America a LIAR. Then low and behold he becomes president of Egypt and now the Taxpayers of America are sending him money! Remember how the U.S. supported Osama bin Laden with money and weapons before he turned on U.S. and destroyed Thousands of People in his attack on the Twin Towers and other fatal attacks around the world?
When will the PEOPLE be able to elect lawmakers who will stop worrying so much about giving money to other COUNTRIES before taking care of AMERICA and American taxpayers? It seems to be IMPOSSIBLE! Imagine what $480 MILLION DOLLARS they want to send to Egypt will do to help people of the United States of America!
Jim Martel
Gilford
Last Updated on Friday, 18 January 2013 01:30
Hits: 75
RSA 24:14 gives convention power to prevent budget transfers
To the editor,
The previous Belknap County Convention was hoodwinked into, a "non-meeting" with the COMMISSION'S Negotiation Committee, which was created to advise the commissioners and accordingly to negotiated on their behalf with the unions. Clearly the previous convention, at some point expressed support for the commission's intent regarding new employment agreements.
The new convention is not empowered to slash any pay raises or any other form of compensation. The contractual agreements resides with the Commission. An action by the convention to violate any contractual agreement will end up in litigation for Unfair Labor Practices.
What this convention can do is not appropriate the money to fund the negotiated raise. Why, because the contractual increases are not bases on the number of employees but per employee. No contract limits the number of employees and accordingly, in the event the amount appropriated by the appropriating authority based or revenues (property taxes) does not rise to the level to pay all existing employees, the number of employees shall be reduced, which unfortunately in recent years has taken place at the state level and private sector.
Belknap County does not have a Charter. Clearly, the commission believes it has a cart blanch, once the Grand Total Resolution by the convention is adopted, that is can and does transfer at will regardless of whether the individual line item appropriations are encumbered or unencumbered. Money is transfer to and from, sometimes adding unfunded purposes.
Hopefully, this new and truly conservative majority convention will seek legal advice from the DRA and AG regarding a previous DRA edict which states the Annual Grand Total Appropriation is the sum of all the individual Line Items which make up the total, Furthermore, all the individual line item appropriations are encumbered and until the encumbrance has been met, no money may be transferred unless unencumbered. Moreover, the only justification for transferring unencumbered money is to offset an individual line item which is anticipated to exceed its estimated expenditure. County commissioners absent a charter are not comparable to a town selectboard or city council, who do have charters.
This County Convention should get the job done on behalf of the taxpayers and not get caught up in the minutia of the blame game. Invoke RSA 24:14: "The county convention may require that the county commissioners obtain written authority from the executive committee before transferring any appropriation or part thereof under RSA 24:15."
Thomas A. Tardif
Laconia
The previous Belknap County Convention was hoodwinked into, a "non-meeting" with the COMMISSION'S Negotiation Committee, which was created to advise the commissioners and accordingly to negotiated on their behalf with the unions. Clearly the previous convention, at some point expressed support for the commission's intent regarding new employment agreements.
The new convention is not empowered to slash any pay raises or any other form of compensation. The contractual agreements resides with the Commission. An action by the convention to violate any contractual agreement will end up in litigation for Unfair Labor Practices.
What this convention can do is not appropriate the money to fund the negotiated raise. Why, because the contractual increases are not bases on the number of employees but per employee. No contract limits the number of employees and accordingly, in the event the amount appropriated by the appropriating authority based or revenues (property taxes) does not rise to the level to pay all existing employees, the number of employees shall be reduced, which unfortunately in recent years has taken place at the state level and private sector.
Belknap County does not have a Charter. Clearly, the commission believes it has a cart blanch, once the Grand Total Resolution by the convention is adopted, that is can and does transfer at will regardless of whether the individual line item appropriations are encumbered or unencumbered. Money is transfer to and from, sometimes adding unfunded purposes.
Hopefully, this new and truly conservative majority convention will seek legal advice from the DRA and AG regarding a previous DRA edict which states the Annual Grand Total Appropriation is the sum of all the individual Line Items which make up the total, Furthermore, all the individual line item appropriations are encumbered and until the encumbrance has been met, no money may be transferred unless unencumbered. Moreover, the only justification for transferring unencumbered money is to offset an individual line item which is anticipated to exceed its estimated expenditure. County commissioners absent a charter are not comparable to a town selectboard or city council, who do have charters.
This County Convention should get the job done on behalf of the taxpayers and not get caught up in the minutia of the blame game. Invoke RSA 24:14: "The county convention may require that the county commissioners obtain written authority from the executive committee before transferring any appropriation or part thereof under RSA 24:15."
Thomas A. Tardif
Laconia
Last Updated on Friday, 18 January 2013 01:26
Hits: 126
More Articles...
