Some bans make sense
I have a conceal-and-carry permit, two handguns, three shotguns and two rifles, yet I strongly support the concept of banning assault weapons, large-capacity magazines and binary triggers. Assault weapons were designed for military, not civilian use, and during the decade that assault weapons were banned, “Mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the federal ban period” between 1994 and 2004, according to an article published in 2019 in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery.
The logic that “if assault weapons are banned is the first step in limiting gun ownership” is absolutely false. IF that statement were true, why didn’t gun sales decrease during the time that there was a national ban on purchasing assault weapons? IF military weapons continue to be purchased by civilians, what’s next … the ability to buy hand grenades or surface to air missiles … it sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it?
I urge the gun owners’ advocates to use some degree of logic when addressing this situation and remember that without assault weapons in the hands of civilians, the number of dead children would have been a fraction of what it has been today. Please review the historical factual data and use common sense when debating this issue … our children’s lives depend on it.
Jack M. Bert, MD, Woodbury
Warming to the idea of voter I.D.
As one who has who has in the past rather vigorously opposed and advocated against voter-identification requirements, I am warming up to the idea, which President Trump falsely claimed the other day that 98% of the public supports.
I doubt that 98% of the public approves of anything; even motherhood and apple pie might register more than 2% detractors.
However, I’m now inclined to join the president’s camp, depending upon what counts as “identification.” Under the pending Trump/MAGA legislation approved on partisan grounds in the House of Representatives, it would generally require a passport or birth certificate.
These are two documents that most people do not carry around with them and often do not have readily available or even easily accessible, especially older people, younger people, racial and ethnic minorities, people who have moved around a lot, and even married women who have taken their spouse’s surname, as about 80% of them have done. That comprises a large number of Americans for whom providing “identification,” especially for mail-in voters (but that’s another issue) may be quite a travail, a bit costly, and possibly discourage them from even trying to register or vote, another feature of the GOP’s broad-based voter suppression strategy.
Nonetheless, if a sensible and non-discriminatory, cost-free identification process can be devised, count me in the voter-identification approval column, along with the other 98%.
Marshall H. Tanick, Minneapolis
Disenfranchising shovelers?
So let me get this straight: With the recent heavy snowstorm in the northeast, New York City’s Mayor Mamdami is hiring snow shovelers to clean up the massive amount of snow across the city. One of the requirements is two forms of I.D.
I’m confused. Democrats are against I.D.s when it comes to voting because they say it disenfranchises primarily minority voters.
So isn’t the mayor disenfranchising those who want to shovel?
Thomas McMahon, White Bear Lake
Enduring songs of protest
Songs of protest have been part of the history of the United States for decades. “What’s Going On” and “We Shall Overcome”, to name two, are still relevant today. I agree with the letter writer’s comment in Thursday’s Pioneer Press (“Grow up”). Some of the current songs of protest say little and often offend. Those that withstand time carry an intelligent message.
Ursula Krawczyk, St. Paul
Minnesota should reimburse the Feds
The state of Minnesota should reimburse DHS for the cost of extra immigration enforcement in Minnesota. I don’t want that on my federal tax tab. The Minnesota mess is rooted in years of incompetent DFL political executives and their lax immigration law enforcement, soft-on-crime approach and general lack of management skills, now exposed in fraud investigations. No ICE surge in Wisconsin or Iowa or Michigan or Missouri, etc. — just Minnesota. What I can’t understand is why do Minnesota folks keep electing these DFL incompetents who focus on ideological nonsense over the simple delivery of efficient and cost-effective services that are common basic needs? Minnesota electors must like reoccurring drama.
Jeff Bump, River Falls
A break for baseball
We all need a break from Mr Trump, the ICE Follies, fraud at the local level and the lingering Minnesota winter. Fortunately, baseball is always a convenient distraction along with our hopes that baseball miracles can still happen here in Minnesota. Catchers and pitchers reported to the Twins camp at Fort Myers a couple of weeks ago and the rest of the team is now there as well. Maybe it is because baseball has an almost Norman Rockwell tradition that helps us feel hopeful again.
It also has a certain zaniness to its structure. A surefire riddle is why has it always taken baseball runners longer to run from second base to third base than for them to run from first base to second base. Well, there has always been a shortstop between second and third.
Hey Ernie, let’s play two today.
Mike Greeman, Woodbury
Putting growth on a pedestal
The Pine Island city administrator made a comment that rural towns are either growing or they’re dying. The mindset of ‘’you’re either growing or you’re dying’’ is a false dichotomy and an exploitative framework to have as a guiding principle. The growth is never enough, people’s homes and farms are only viewed as commodities, objects, things to conquer and bulldoze to make way for something “bigger and better.” This mindset places growth on a pedestal that can do no wrong and is used to justify any and all harm caused. The goal should be healthy, stable and sustainable population and communities, not growth at all cost. Harm needs to be prevented, not treated as “just part of the process.”
Google uses market-based emissions instead of location-based emissions. Franz Ressel states to The Guardian: “Market-based emissions are a corporate-friendly metric that obscures a polluter’s actual impact on the environment. It allows companies to pollute in one place, and try to ‘offset’ those emissions by purchasing energy contracts in another place.” This is exploitation. You cannot just throw out money and say “Hey look! We’re giving money to the school so everything is fine!” That’s not how it works. We have been stating over and over again that the permanent loss of our rural town identity, property value depreciation, permanent damage to our ecosystems, adverse health effects from light, noise and air pollution are not fair tradeoffs.
Pine Island continues to show they’re using exploitative frameworks as their guiding principles. Google is a trillion-dollar company and does not need any sort of tax abatement. We still don’t know how much power it’s going to use. The NDAs are still signed. The lawsuit is still being dismissed as inconsequential by the city. Public process and resident voices are still being ignored. Google is in the Epstein Files, release the Epstein Files. The city and the developer continue to spout false information and half truths at best. We are fed up.
Aubree Derksen, Pine Island
Related Articles
Jury awards $17M to family of St. Paul woman killed by boyfriend, who was found not guilty by reason of mental illness
St. Paul: Ex-gas station employee gets 3-year prison term for shooting 2 men during fight outside store
Met Council weighs new bus rapid transit service for St. Paul’s West Seventh Street
St. Paul Public Schools has spent nearly $1M on virtual learning, other support for immigrant families
Minneapolis man gets 40-year prison sentence for trafficking, sexually assaulting teen and woman at Mahtomedi apartment
Leave a Reply