Fees OK but keeping tabs on citizens is not
The proposed miles-driven fees are fine, but surveilling the citizenry is not.
Governments are entirely too curious about our lives as it is, and all too willing to regulate us into conformity while taxing us into the poor house.
It is time to halt and reverse the monotonic erosion of our privacy and everyday liberties. To quote H.D. Thoreau: "The best government is that which governs least."
Government must stop trying to control lives
I absolutely do not approve of the proposed miles-driven usage tax. There are enough fees, regulations and taxes burdening Californians. The government must quit trying to control every aspect of a resident's life.
Gun rights need to be expanded
After hearing of the shooting spree at the movie theater outside Denver, I expect the Times will be inundated with letters from anti-gun activists decrying our "permissive gun culture."
This happens whenever some well-armed lunatic lets loose on a crowd of unarmed people. Those reflexively hostile to Second Amendment rights pounce at every opportunity to advance their agenda to disarm America.
One thing's certain: If most
Although it's true anyone so disturbed as to even contemplate such an action is unlikely to calculate the odds of survival, it's equally true a well-armed crowd is much more able to defend itself.
I have no doubt many fewer people would have died or been injured in this incident if people had been better able to defend themselves.
That's why all right-thinking Americans should support the National Rifle Association's efforts to eliminate any restrictions on the right to possess and carry firearms.
When every American is free to own and carry whatever kind of weapon he or she chooses, then and only then will we all be safe and secure in our homes and in our persons.
Come to conclusion on Mirkarimi case
I sure feel sorry for San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi. His wife, Eliana Lopez, now returning from her hometown where she was caring for her sick father, is now back in the States, supposedly to defend her husband. Actually, she seems to be tightening the noose around his neck by showing the bruise on her arm, over and over again.
How many wives have had their husbands lovingly grab their arms and leave fingerprint bruises? The most loving couples have friction now and then but they manage to kiss and make up. Once it goes public, it is blown so out of proportion, a reconciliation seems impossible.
Such a pity that a moment of lost temper could cause him to lose his job and she has to leave the country with their child.
The media and lawyers are not being any help. They seem to enjoy keeping this story in the limelight. Is there nothing better to do? Come to some conclusion.
Taking steps toward government control
Let's get back to the meaning of the Second Amendment by comparing two excerpts from the Constitution.
Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 3: No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace.
Amendment II: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
In old military catalogs, the world "regulation" is used when referring to military equipment, everything from uniforms to weapons. Currently our military is physically incapable of ruling the country by force because the means of production and distribution is privately controlled and the right to bear arms is the balance of power. Any infringement on this right is an act of subversion.
While we are at it, we should take a good look at civil rights laws, labor laws and environmental laws that are steps toward government control of our defense industries.
Not disrupting Palestinian events
In response to the increasing occurrence of protesters disrupting pro-Israel events, a July 26 letter writer points to a 1994 protest in Berkeley against "the renowned British historian" David Irving.
Irving is widely known as a Holocaust denier whose academic standing is discredited, not renowned.
His works were described as "worthless" by an expert witness in a libel trial against an American author. The British judge ruled that Irving is a Holocaust denier, an anti-Semite and a racist.
The 1994 Berkeley protesters carried anti-Nazi signs, showing that they were motivated by Irving's sympathy for Nazis -- not his view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
While Israel supporters demand the right to express our views, we don't try to disrupt pro-Palestinian events.