Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Concealed-weapons laws will prevent Wild West scenarios

Re: Bringing the Wild West to Florida, March 27.

As usual, Martin Dyckman's column on SB 436 shows he did not research the subject thoroughly.

Dyckman constructs scenarios showing how dangerous using self-defense will become.

What he forgot is that Florida has laws about carrying concealed weapons. Unless one has a state-issued concealed weapons permit, it is illegal to carry a weapon on your person. His scenario about two drunks arguing in a bar is silly since the state prohibits carrying in bars or in the area of bars inside restaurants. Plus, police tend to frown on people carrying weapons while intoxicated.

His other scenario about a traffic accident is far-fetched. The proposed law has more to do with defending against a road rage incident or a carjacking.

This is not the first time Dyckman has hyperventilated about weapons, nor will it probably be the last. I just hope he will get his facts straight before he sits down at his keyboard.

Deadly force bill is common sense

Re: Bringing the Wild West to Florida, March 27.

I feel an obligation to point out some misleading statements in Martin Dyckman's column. It is illegal to carry firearms into bars, as anyone with a concealed weapons permit knows. It is also illegal for a citizen to carry concealed weapons without a permit. Most if not all theme parks prohibit concealed weapons in their parks and anyone who has visited one since 9/11 knows they inspect pretty thoroughly.

I do not see how anyone can read anything but common sense in the language of SB 436. A person should have the right to meet force with the same level of force without having to think about whether he or she should have to flee because of some nonsensical law. We do not subject law enforcement to that type of idiotic rule. We should not hold law-abiding citizens to laws where a delay in decisionmaking could cost their lives.

Focus on victims of gun violence

Re: Bringing the Wild West to Florida, by Martin Dyckman, March 27.

Finally, we see a journalist address the issue that other journalists seem to avoid: the victims of gun violence as it relates to state government. Time after time, we see journalists focus on gun owners' rights and completely bypass the victims of gun violence and their plight. Martin Dyckman seems to be the exception.

This newspaper has covered for several years the activities of the state legislators as they pander to the gun lobby (the National Rifle Association). Yet when have the legislators last passed any common-sense laws to keep guns away from gun criminals? If one reads between the lines of Dyckman's article, it seems logical they have no intention of doing so.

The only real question

Re: Zealotry and its victims, by Robyn Blumner, March 27.

I am not a religious zealot; I do however believe in God and Jesus Christ as our savior.

Robyn Blumner's antireligion column was well-timed to be published on Easter Sunday - talk about brain dead.

It's very clear this columnist just likes to jump on the side of the most favorable polls that never asked the real question.

Do we as free Americans believe in starving another human being to death? That's the only real question. I do not believe most Americans believe in starving another human to death. I can guarantee that at the next election there will be a lot of politicians facing where they stood on starving a human being to death. I have their names handy and we will see what the real polls say on voting day.

Extremists exist on both sides

Re: Zealotry and its victims.

In her usual vitriolic manner, Robyn Blumner attacks religious faith again. What Blumner routinely fails to do in her race to condemn people of faith is to decry zealotry from all factions, including atheists, feminists, or any of the other secularist groups she so passionately defends.

Certainly, there is a fringe element attached to any large demographic group. People of faith are not exempt. These fanatics should be marginalized by the core group. But let's not ignore the fringe lunatics on the other side. There are people on Blumner's "preferred list" who embody the definition of extremists.

Support life for the living

It is pretty unusual for me, of all people, to agree with Robyn Blumner, but her March 27 column was right on. My children and I have suffered tremendously since their dad went MIA (or deadbeat). Nobody cares to bother and find him. I mean, what a waste of time and taxpayer money, making sure our children are supported. We have no insurance, no safety net. But I sure don't see the protesters and politicians and other "leaders" shouting to the media. We have no TV or Capitol Hill coverage for all the single moms and kids who are desperate to live in healthy, dignified, and "normal" conditions. Where are the people who "support life" for the living?

The voice of the majority

Re: Living will is the best revenge, by Robert Friedman, March 27.

My friends and I have waited for a long time to read this most eloquent column. I have copied and sent it to all those who do not have access to the St. Petersburg Times, and I would recommend it to anyone who missed it in Sunday's Perspective section.

We have discussed many times the print and vocal media morass of fanaticism arising out of what should have been a quiet, private, peaceful final earthly journey for this poor woman.

Thank you to Robert Friedman who has voiced the sentiments of what we sincerely believe is the quiet majority's opinion as to what had become the abominable circus of politicians, fanatics and those tragically insensitive to what was truly merciful consideration for Ms. Schiavo and her own personal desires.

The charts and graphs of all the polls certainly have given the proper perspective as to where majority of public opinion lies in this regard. May she finally rest in the peace she deserves.

Column was on the mark

Re: Living will is the best revenge.

Robert Friedman nailed it in this column. He pulled every inch of this horror into its appropriate niche. Thank you, thank you, thank you. I think the only thing you left out was:

I want to create an environment so unsafe that 600 schoolchildren have to be evicted from their school so I can express how pious I am and my deep, loving reverence for "life."

Friedman should be careful, though - evidently these life-lovin' partisans have a hobby of making death threats - all in the name of "life," don'tcha know?

[Last modified April 3, 2005, 00:09:18]