Gun bans not needed Friends, family and neighbors: Do we need to ban guns from the average individual? Guns have been in many families for these reasons: to hunt game and to protect one and his dear ones.
They say guns kill, but don't other things also kill? Such as the car, arrows, knives, even the fist? All these and other things have been known to kill. Are they also to be banned?
What is one to do if one were attacked by another to protect one's life? I guess it would mean we shouldn't even consider protecting ourselves. Wouldn't it be right for one to have something for protection. By all means a gun should never ever be banned, no matter how many or how few one has.
Doesn't the Constitution give us all the right to bear arms? Take the gun away and things would easily get to be out of control. The different branches of the military would be easily defeated. Is this what we want?
Many of us would never have the protection of a gun if and when needed and this would be a open door for those threatening our lives.
Frank Salvado
Clarkston
Point obscured Bridger Barnett missed the point of my letter about Sheriff Ken Bancroft by such a wide margin I actually considered contacting the Asotin County Sheriff's Posse to see if they could help him find it.
While I don't know Bancroft personally, I respect the work he does to keep my family and me safe from criminals. Heck, I even voted for him.
But since Barnett seems incapable of understanding even rudimentary hyperbole, I offer up words from the president of the National Sheriff's Association, Sheriff Larry Amerson, who writes, "Our nation's sheriffs protect their citizens' individual rights through the elected office of sheriff.
"However, individual sheriffs should not fall into the mythology that any 'oath of office' taken by the man or woman who fills the position of sheriff conveys upon that individual any extraordinary powers or duties that are not otherwise set out under the constitutions and laws of the respective states. Furthermore, a sheriff should always perform his or her duties in accordance with the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court."
I could not agree more.
Brian Kolstad
Clarkston
Idiots in Congress Yes, of course, we are in debt. If you remember, the Bush/Cheney administration started two wars with no way to pay for them, but they did cut taxes instead. Now, the Republicans don't want to have any success for the Obama administration so they refuse to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for the two wars or even close loopholes for the big shots who fund their campaigns. The wealthy hire numerous lawyers or put their money in the Cayman Islands so they don't have to pay any taxes.
As to sane gun laws, the idiot members of Congress, Republican or Democrat, who vote against it should not be re-elected to the office. (The Senate did pass the sane gun bill out of committee without a single Republican vote.)
If the 92 percent who want sensible gun laws actually vote, I would hope they vote against the members of Congress who didn't vote for sensible gun laws.
Let the National Rifle Association know that we have power also.
A.R. Mitchell
Lewiston