Letters to the editor

Slick talker

Get control of the financial system then you control everything, is Obama’s credo. His socialist buddies, mentors and spiritual leaders are delirious with an ecstasy bordering on euphoria not seen since Lenin took violent control of the Russian government back in the early 1900s.

First, healthcare. Huge financial programs involved in that system are crucial to his gaining control. Next comes the energy resources of this country; the EPA is his weapon of choice. “Man-made” global warming is his excuse to wrest control of all energy resources in this country.

The climate has been used by high priests and absolute monarchs from time immemorial to demonstrate a divine dissatisfaction with sinners and take power over all, promising their way is the only way to salvation. Here comes Obama promising the exact same thing and allowing no debate or contrasting viewpoints whatsoever.

How many times does it take for demagogues to drive their countries into chaos and ruin (Soviet Union, North Korea, Hitler’s Germany, ad infinitum) before this country wakes up and takes notice that is exactly where this country is heading at flank speed? Witness the erosion of our Constitution by this ideologue and his cronies in the Senate and House (Pelosi and Reid), not to mention the most corrupt of all, Eric Holder, the attorney general who refuses to enforce any laws in the Constitution Obama deems harmful to his “cause.” This country’s reputation and stalwart defense of freedom has been replaced with hot air, biliousness and disdain for anything not directly connected to his quest for power.

The rest of the world is astounded someone like Obama, with only a hare-brained socialist dogma as a reference could have been elected to the highest office in the United States. But a glance in the rear-view mirror illustrates the power of a speech; Stalin, Castro, Hitler, Chavez, etc. all promising nirvana if only they had absolute control. Well, here we are once more listening to a slick-talking doomsayer screeching he needs that absolute control through the EPA, BLM, IRS, etc. to send us all to his heavenly paradise. I ain’t buying a ticket on that bus.

Charles Reynolds


Stand your ground

The media is reporting that the NAACP and others in the black community are opposed to the so-called Stand Your Ground law. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton came to Florida to oppose it. Patricia Rosier, president of the National Bar Association, said, “We view these laws as a license to kill.” The point about such laws being a “license to kill” is echoed by other officers in the National Bar Association, such as Khyla D. Craine.

Opposition is not limited to the black community. There are many reasons for other people to oppose it. In the six years before “stand your ground” passed in 2005, Florida averaged 34 justifiable homicides per year. There were 206 justifiable homicides in the six-year period.

For the first four years after it passed, Florida averaged 83 justifiable homicides per year. There were 333 such homicides in four years, a shorter period of time. The number of justifiable homicides more than doubled.

This probably means that more homicides are being ruled justifiable homicides and dismissed without much investigation.

Does “stand your ground” strike terror into the hearts of criminals? Take a look at the number of police killed in the line of duty in Florida. In the six years before this law passed, 1999 to 2004, Florida had eight police officers killed in the line of duty. In the six years following passage, 2006 to 2011, there were 25 officers killed. That is more than three times as many police deaths in the aftermath of a law that is supposed to make us safer.

It is painfully obvious that “stand your ground” is a bad law. Many shootings happen within a household during arguments. What happens when husband and wife are both boiling mad and both have a handgun? Both have an equal right to stand their ground. It’s a recipe for disaster. The same applies if two brothers are arguing, or two roommates.

In the end, “stand your ground” just encourages police and prosecutors to jump to the conclusion that whoever winds up dead must have been wrong.

Dale L. Gillis