Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Another winter punch heading toward Ohio
Complaints against officer keep coming
Woman rescued after falling through rotting floor in house
Police say couple had 50 stolen hubcaps
Strip club hosts 'Lap dances for Haiti'
Teen driver crashes into Bath Twp. home
Police: Ohio girl dies after fall into snow bank
Blogs:
First Bell - On Education:
State auditor cites Highland Athletic Booster Club
Pets:
Pet telethon re-airs
The Heldenfiles:
NBC Releases Olympics Announcer List
Akron Zips:
Zips favored on road against MAC West leader
Tribe Matters:
Blogmail response on Hafner
Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth's contract terminated
Balanced Ledger:
QB in Browns future: another mock draft
Kent State Sports:
KSU Notes – February 9
Cleveland Cavaliers:
New York Media Begins to Acknowledge Reality?
Buckeye Blogging:
Buckeyes grab 18 players on signing day
Varsity Letters:
Five local gridders to play in Big33
All Da King's Men:
Palin At The Tea Party Convention
Blog of Mass Destruction:
Republican Pre-Conditions
Akron Law Café:
Law, Love and Chocolate
Car Chase:
Collector Car Hobby Loses One of the Best—Jim Roll
Let's Talk Real Estate:
Decisions Decisions: Credit Cards or Your Mortgage?
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Loucile is looking for a Lake Erie getaway in June for three kids, ages 1, 3, and 5.
Sound Check:
Talk of the Town – Top entertainment picks for the weekend
HRLite House:
OFCCP Report
Akron Gamer:
Makers of 'Castle Crashers' unveil 'BattleBlock Theater'
See Jane Style:
Do IT this week: Layering
Published on Friday, Nov 16, 2007
In response to the Oct. 31 story about the upcoming gun buyback slated for Dec. 7 and 8 in Akron (''Summit program to buy back guns planned''), I have some observations.
First, there is no such thing as a gun ''buyback.'' The word implies that the police had owned the guns at some time, which is not the case, so they aren't buying them back.
Semantics aside, I am alarmed that the Akron Police Department and the Rev. Marc Neal are encouraging people to anonymously turn in illegal as well as legal guns for vouchers. This sends the wrong message.
What they are saying, in effect, is: ''It's OK to steal, so long as it's guns. In fact, we'll fence them for you. We'll give you $100 or more, no questions asked.''
The police should be at the forefront of the effort to trace illegal guns back to their source. Instead, by not requiring identification, they are now part of the problem.
This is merely a feel-good measure that will have zero effect on street crime. No gang member is going to turn in a modern, working firearm for a $100 shoe voucher. It simply isn't going to happen.
Historically, almost all buyback programs have resulted in people turning in broken and inoperative guns, basically worthless junk, for good money. That's why the buybacks disappeared. They didn't work.
I worked in a gun store for three years until retiring recently, and I agree there are a lot of guns in the wrong hands. One of the big problems is that, in Ohio, it takes a felony, domestic violence or drug conviction to disqualify you from purchasing guns legally. If you're the type of person who has 257 misdemeanors on your record and spends every weekend in jail, guess what? You often sail right through the Brady background check.
Even worse, under federal law, aliens who have been in this country for as little as 90 days can buy firearms legally in a gun store. That's right. For the most part, we have no way of checking on what crimes they may have committed in the their home country. So they get their weapon. How much sense does that make?
In any event, paying people to anonymously turn in stolen and junk guns isn't the answer.
Ralph T. Kane
Salem
Fear strikes out
I recently read that after an election in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan, the gist of of the victory speech was, ''Hope beats fear.''
Interesting concept.
Donna Frahmann
Akron
Investigation
is unnecessary
In your Nov. 1 editorial headlined ''Public exposure,'' you called for the Ohio General Assembly to investigate the acquisition of the publicly traded, long-term care company Manor Care by a private equity firm.
There would be no benefit to the legislature wasting its time with such an investigation.
Yes, a union seeking to organize Manor Care workers has made speculative and unsubstantiated attacks against the company and the proposed deal. But aside from giving a forum for further speculation and innuendo, there is nothing that a legislative investigation could accomplish.
The private equity firm acquiring Manor Care has stated that it will be leaving the existing management team in place. It is making the acquisition precisely because Manor Care has a proven track record of success.
Moreover, a legislative investigation based on pure speculation would be wasteful, because Ohio already has in place an extensive regulatory system that provides strong oversight of skilled nursing facilities.
The proof will be in the pudding — whether Manor Care facilities continue to operate at the same level of quality after the transaction as they currently do.
Peter Van Runkle
Executive director
Ohio Health Care Association
Lewis Center
Simple explanation for
Bush administration
If you find the actions of our government over the past several years puzzling, as do I, it may be that we are simply overthinking the process.
Under the Bush administration, we have:
Engaged in the first pre-emptive war in our history.
Spent $20 billion per month to topple a ''threat'' that had no teeth.
Denied essential domestic spending, such as the rebuilding of New Orleans and the expansion of health-insurance coverage for impoverished children.
Continued unprecedented support for no-bid, multibillion-dollar awards to companies that remain to be held accountable for where billions of dollars of taxpayer money were spent.
Brought sword-rattling to the forefront of American diplomacy, and continue the pattern now to vilify Iran in such a way as to nearly guarantee that the war-machine juggernaut chugs along unencumbered.
Promoted as patriotic the dismantling of fundamental rights outlined in our Declaration of Independence and codified in the Constitution, including habeas corpus, instead allowing warrantless wiretapping of Americans and disdain for the First Amendment.
Forbade Medicare from directly negotiating with pharmaceutical companies for best pricing.
Limited insurance-industry liabilities, even when the suits brought are not ''frivolous.''
The list of seemingly nonsensical actions and attitudes goes on and on. This bastion of democratic principles has ignored the will of an overwhelming majority of Americans — for years. The real question to ask becomes: ''Why?''
Try as I might, the only point of view in which all of the bewildering actions of the past six years begin to make sense is the same as the thread that unraveled Watergate:
''Follow the money.''
The questions to ask are: Who profits? And by how much?
The information is certainly available. We have only to spend a little time and very little effort to search through the myriad of online public resources, including corporate tax filings and financial statements.
In light of billions of dollars flowing into the pockets of administration friends, all the seeming madness begins to make sickening sense.
The only remaining question is how long will we continue to put up with it?
It appears that some, at least, have been able to put a price on American military lives. I have to wonder how long the rest of us can live with that.
Mike Croghan
Akron
Small blessings
Thank you, Akron Public Schools Superintendent Sylvester Small, for all of the years you have invested in the children of Akron.
We have indeed been blessed by your insight and wisdom.
Debbie Casey
Akron
City Council should
show some backbone
So Americans United for Separation of Church and State sent a letter to the Akron City Council threatening to sue unless the Lord's Prayer was silenced. I'd like to see our elected council members show us some backbone.
Bring 'em on. Let 'em sue.
It does appear to be easier to roll over and play dead than to fight. After all, Council President Marco Sommerville said, ''There is no need for litigation that we know we can lose.''
This is the same ideology that prevailed in communist Russia when the state ruled against God. It's just one more nail in the coffin to establish a godless society.
My Bible tells me: ''Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and swear by his name.
''Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of people around you . . . lest the anger of the Lord be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the Earth.''
Then whom should we obey, man or God?
Carol Dillon
Akron
Too much
to ask for?
I admit I was irritated initially at the announcement by Sens. Charles Schumer of New York and Diane Feinstein of California that they would support the nomination of Michael Mukasey to be the new attorney general in spite of his reluctance to condemn waterboarding as torture.
But this irritation gave way to a realization that a reason cited by both senators was correct: Mukasey is the best we're likely to get.
The Bush administration's willingness to tolerate the unqualified Alberto Gonzales as attorney general is compelling proof of how little interest it has in a functional Justice Department.
I hope Mukasey can help Justice find its way back.
But there is no reason to believe the attorney general who comes after Mukasey won't be left with some restoration work to do.
Douglas P. McFarling
Ravenna
Get the full article here.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
