Wednesday's Letters to the Editor

Enforcing the law

EDITOR: I think that the people of Mendocino County who elected Sheriff Tom Allman expected him to uphold and enforce all the laws, not just the ones he likes or dislikes on a personal basis ("Sheriff Allman joins gun debate," Saturday). I'm sure that Allman, if faced with someone with an assault rifle with a 30-round clip, would say, "Good for the Second Amendment. He (or she) needs that for hunting."


Santa Rosa

Whistle-blower jailed

EDITOR: John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer and whistle-blower, has been sentenced to 30 months in prison ("Ex-CIA officer gets prison in news leaks," Saturday). In 2007, he confirmed the use of water-boarding and described it as torture. He joins Daniel Ellsberg, Bradley Manning and many others pursued by the government in an effort to intimidate those with access to "secrets" from releasing them.

When President Barack Obama was campaigning, he indicated he would support whistle-blowers. Now, in power, he doesn't, though whistle-blowers are supposedly protected by the Whistle-blower Protection Act of 1989. Hypocrisy is an equal opportunity pastime.

No one involved with torturing detainees has been sent to prison. What a surprise.

For a democracy to function, citizens need to know what's really happening. And we don't.


Santa Rosa

Drugging the masses

EDITOR: My four children never had a cavity. They grew up in Stockton, so we wondered if Stockton fluoridated the water during the time we were there and if that could be the reason the kids had such good teeth.

But we discovered that the powers-that-be in Stockton realized that only 2 percent of the water used actually was ingested, and the water ingested did nothing for the teeth. They agreed that fluoride just might help teeth if they were brushed with it. They then decided that if people thought they needed fluoride, they could certainly get it elsewhere. It is very costly to fluoridate a water system and they couldn't see doing it for such a small return on investment. Amazing that they had the foresight to do it this way.

It's truly a pity that more city officials can't understand that it is a violation of constitutional rights to drug the masses with a very toxic substance that is 1) not cost effective; 2) hazardous to the elderly since they can't flush it out of their bodies like younger people; 3) the first ingredient in insecticide. Are we sure we want to drink that stuff?

We decided that my children had such good teeth because of their genetics. Certainly it's not from fluoride.


Santa Rosa

Right of self-defense

EDITOR: Only a weak mind, or one that is the product of an education system mandated by its state legislature to favor politically correct subject matter over U.S. history and the Constitution, would posit as a reason to restrict our Second Amendment rights the argument that hunters don't need semi-automatic rifles to shoot deer. The purpose of the Second Amendment isn't to ensure that hunters have ample weaponry to bring down game. Its purpose is to ensure that the federal government couldn't deprive its citizens of the ancient right to arm themselves for lawful means, such as self-defense, including protection against government's unlawful abridgment of their God-given rights.

You need not be paranoid, or think it likely, or even remotely possible, that the need might ever arise to exercise your rights under the Second Amendment, to appreciate it as a bulwark for individual liberty.

This does not mean that the government cannot place reasonable restrictions on gun and ammunition ownership and usage so long as those restrictions don't unnecessarily burden a lawful citizen's right of self-defense. It's not for me to dictate to those living in Oakland, south Los Angeles, south Chicago, Detroit or even rural America what is or is not reasonable and necessary for their self-defense.


Santa Rosa