Lost/stolen gun law plays well with market
Re: the March 8 article "Tucson may get law on reporting lost, stolen guns."
The Tucson City Council's idea to require reporting of lost/stolen guns provides an excellent way to bring the free market into gun ownership.
The legal owner of the gun is legally responsible for that weapon until legally transferred or reported lost/stolen. The owner can be self-insured against misuse or, as with other liabilities, can seek private insurance.
What responsible property owner wouldn't want to be insured against foreseeable risk?
Release indicates little respect for citizens
From the top down, the Obama administration seems to have little respect or regard for the safety of legal U.S. residents.
First, it produced "Fast and Furious," which allowed guns to get into criminals' hands and kill people. Now, it's given us what could be called "Rápido y Furioso" by suddenly releasing thousands of law-breakers (illegal immigrants) into the population of legal residents.
In both cases, department heads of the offending government organizations (Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano) go unscathed because each supposedly knew nothing about the action.
President Obama and his political allies are quick to publicly condemn the CEO of a "big oil" or "big bank" or "big pharma" organization when some far-removed manager does something bad that the CEO knew nothing about, but for ignorant incompetent appointed bureaucrats it's just business as usual.
Matthew J. Scully
US needs a 'Common Sense Commission'
Re: the March 10 article "Gang of 8 fighting deadline, gridlock on immigration."
When the current Gang of Eight in Congress is through with immigration, persuade it to work toward establishing a Common Sense Commission, constructed along the lines of the Base Closure Commission that successfully overrode special interests in doing what was needed for the country.
Point the Common Sense Commission at three of the major problems facing the country, requiring that a slate of up or down law changes be created in each of the following areas: Why medical bills are killing us, ways to cut defense spending, and protect children, not guns.
Recent articles in these areas point the way.
Law won't stop bad guys, up enforcement
Re: the March 8 article "Panel OKs more jail time for straw buyers of guns" and the March 10 editorial "US should make straw purchases of guns a felony."
So, yet another gun law, this time against straw purchases, which are already illegal.
As a gun owner, and Second Amendment advocate, I could actually support this one, except for one small detail. This would be supporting a mental illness run rampant through the anti-gun crowd - that if we just had one more law, the bad guys would see the error of their ways and give up their business profits.
The editorial even stated that the current law is seldom enforced by overburdened local law enforcement. What makes you think that an overburdened fed law enforcement is going to set aside more important cases to prosecute these?
No, this law will be set aside, just like the ones currently on the books, but we will "feel good about ourselves" because we at least "did something." Grow up, people: If you don't enforce the law, the criminals will never follow them.
William D. Werries
Investigative reporting shows Star's relevance
Re: the March 10 article "Fimbres linked to special TCC deals."
The article about Tucson City Councilman Richard Fimbres emphasizes the importance of the Arizona Daily Star.
Protected by the First Amendment, papers like the Star undertake to look into suspicious doings of the powerful exposing them to light.
Perhaps Fimbres did nothing wrong. But that will be determined because of the Star's investigative reporting. It represents the kind of journalism local papers undertake.
While satisfying to journalists, it can be expensive and dangerous. It is not free and must be supported. That support is slipping in the U.S., as American newspaper readership declines. Without readers newspapers will fail, and we will all be the poorer as questionable, undisclosed acts of the powerful go unexamined.
We are lucky to have the Star. Actual and potential readers might ask themselves if we don't all share an obligation to keep the paper going, to keep such journalism alive and healthy.
Retired, Oro Valley