It is difficult to understand what the National Rifle Association and its supporters are finding difficult, if not impossible, to accept in the actions proposed by President Obama and Vice President Biden on the purchase of and ownership of firearms.

One of the measures proposed is background checks on potential buyers. What is the problem with that? You can’t even get a minimum-wage job without a background check.

It certainly makes a lot of sense that a background check would be required to purchase a potentially lethal weapon.

The young man who used an assault-type weapon, capable of firing many, many cartridges without reloading, to kill 20 children and six adults apparently had a mental-health problem.

It is amazing that his mother kept weapons of this type in their home and that he had access to them. She paid for that mistake with her life.

The actions proposed by the president and vice president will make more help available to people like that young man and his mother, something that has not been available for many years now.

We have been willing to lock disturbed individuals in jails if they commit crimes, but not to provide the treatment and structured environments required to treat the problem, not add to it.

No civilian has a need for an assault weapon. You think you can use one to go duck hunting and get a whole bunch of ducks by spraying the flock with bullets?

Janet Daily


Taking the green ?out of Green

To Wayne Wiethe, Dick Norton and the city of Green planning committee: By all means, continue to transform what once was the beautiful little city of Green into yet another noisy, crowded, pollution-filled, wall-to-wall development in the grand tradition of Belden Village and Chapel Hill (“Green eyes district for entertainment,” Jan. 25).

I am anxiously awaiting the announcement of where in Green the next, much-needed monster Walmart will be located. Just think how many more green acres could be decimated.

The planning director, mayor and planning committee are well on their way to obliterating what little green actually remains of Green.

Planting a few trees and flowers around acres and acres of cement will never begin to replace what the city is losing — woods, fields, grassland, wildlife, wetlands and breathing room. Why do you think people moved to Green in the first place?

Surely, by now, with all the new development Green has built, city leaders should have enough money to maintain their community at a comfortable standard. If they don’t, then there is something seriously wrong.

I wish someone would explain to me the seemingly insatiable need to fill every single square foot of green space with commercial buildings, housing developments and parking lots. Aside from greed, that is.

P.D. Wilson

Springfield Township

A woman’s decision

January marks an important time for women’s rights because Jan. 22 was the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Forty years ago, women were given the freedom to choose safe and legal abortion.

Forty years is a long time, and we are still using the tired labels of “pro-choice” and “pro-life.” These labels cannot fully describe the complexity of this issue.

Instead of labeling yourself, think more deeply about what legal abortion means to women and what it means to you. Abortion is a complex and emotional issue that cannot be decided for women. People cannot possibly put themselves in the shoes of women who are dealing with the issue of abortion.

Certainly, politicians cannot decide for a woman. The only person who can make this decision is the woman, with the help of her support circle, health-care provider and anyone else to whom she may turn.

So before applying these labels to yourself and others, you should realize that while you may not feel you could support abortion, you could support a woman’s decision.

Corey Raleigh