OCR Text |
Show Page The National Enterprise, April 20. 1977 twenty-tw-o Editor: Letters Editor: The main question which comes to mind when reading Parker Nielsons commentary on gun control is: Where has Mr. Nielson been his whole life or has he been alive at all? Never have I been exposed to such a naive or ridiculous comment on the gun control issue as I was while reading Mr. Parker Nielson's 1 comments. agree wholeheartedly that it would be a wonderful thing if we could get rid of all of the guns in this country and the entire And while were world for that matter. we just as well get rid of dreaming, why dont all of the nuclear weapons in the world. No one can deny that the world would be much better off without these things. But how, Mr. Nielson, do you propose getting rid of the guns? Do you, can you believe even for a minute that you could take the guns away from any but the gun owners? What have you accomplished by doing that? Youve simply taken the guns away from those who would have been the least likely to commit acts of violence with the guns. Do you think that the punks who are presently carrying Saturday Night Specials are going to come into your little gun collection center and give you their guns? I must again ask, where have you been all your life? Herion is illegal. How is it then that the heroin problem is increasing rather than decreasing? Have you ever heard of Prohibition? No one consumed alcoholic beverages during that period, did they? law-abidi- ng No law, no amount of control is going to prevent the criminal element in this country from obtaining guns. If you cannot see this then I would welcome any solution that may be offered to the problem. The final point upon which I must comment is the most ridiculous of all. Disarm the police? Lock up their guns at the station or in the Parker M. Nielsons column in the April 13th Utah edition was Ludicrous because he both ludicrous and dangerous. completely ignored reality and dangerous because his lack of responsibility endangers a reasoned approach to gun control. trunks of their cars? If the police had advance notice each time a crime was going to be committed there would be virtually no crime. If a police officer knew with certainty whether an individual was going to be violent or armed, then he could comfortably leave his gun in his car. Are you willing to take the responsibility upon your self, Mr. Nielson, to tell our police officers when they will or will not need their guns? 1 suppose you would and then when our police start getting shot you would simply blame the whole thing on the lack of gun control. In his column Mr. Nielson suggests there was no reason for police officers to carry weapons while on stack outs of harmless suspects, and even goes so far as to state that they rarely need guns on their person even while on (normal) Is it Mr. Nielson who guarantees the harmlessness of duty. suspects? Is it Mr. Nielson who guarantees a safe run of events during a policemans working day? That is a sick laugh! And The fact is that no suspect can be deemed harmless. anyone who has stood in a policemans shoes knows that by merely donning a uniform he will draw the attention and malice of every sort of pervert and violent personality. Was the policeman shot while riding past Liberty Park protected because he did or did not have a gun? Mr. Nielson has brought a horribly vivid picture to mind of a cowering policeman asking permission of a resisting murderer to go to the station and get his gun so the policeman can influence the murderer not to resist arrest. . Yes, Mr. Nielson, the incident in which Officer Olson was accidentally shot was indeed tragic, more tragic than you can begin to realize since you are more than likely not familiar with either Officer Olson or Officer Roberts. But, in spite of your views, I feel that it would be more tragic if you needed the aid of an armed police officer at your home or business but were unable to receive it because the police had to report to the station to have a weapon checked out to them before they could respond to help you. As I said before, if a realistic plan can be devised for the disarming of America I will give it my full support. Until that time, which I honestly feel will never come, lets stop the kind of thinking which you have exhibited and concentrate our efforts on supporting our police and passing laws to make the commission of crimes with guns much more serious offenses. As the system stands now a person who commits a robbery and then kills his victim to avoid leaving any witnesses knows full well beforehand-thaif he is caught and convicted he will probably be up for parole almost as quickly as he would if he had not killed his victim. If you dont believe that, you should check it out. There are a lot of things you should check out, Mr. Nielson. t Don R. Schow But more than that. By his thoughtless argument, Mr. Nielson has given more reason for gun lobbyists to assert that gun control is a mindless reaction to violence. N. Larry Jack I Open Account 3 Carter Action No Salvation for Utah by Chuck Akerlow The NBC Saturday Evening News intoned that President Carter would let 15 of the threatened water projects move ahead and the announcer noted that one of those saved was the Central Utah Project (CUP). For one brief, fleeting moment there was hope. Then the story came out. What the President proposed was to complete the Currant Creek Project at a cost 3.6 of the total CUP and a project which is already 95 complete. Nice of him. But the fact is that Carter wants the CUP dead. The reason for his antipathy toward the project is unclear. There was some mumbo-jumb- o about confounding the habitat of Peregrin Falcons and some water fowl. Somehow I can foresee a time when the entire population of man has dried and shirvelled while the Peregrin Falcon flourishes. There was also some talk about the ratio, which we have noted before is absurd in the face of the other totally activities of government particularly in education, health and welfare. cost-benef- it non-producti- on Finally, the President says we should look for alternative sources of water. No explanation here. Perhaps we should dig another river. Or step up our rain dance activities. Or maybe pipe it down from Canada. The one hope on CUP is that the Congress will package all of the thirty projects in its public works bill and send it to the White House thus putting the President in the position of vetoing the whole package. The fact that Congress is likely to pass such a bill comes as a result of the inept handling of Congressional relations by the Carter Administration. Of course one might suggest that this ineptitude is symptomatic of a President with a bowed neck who may just likely veto the whole package. I suppose the sensible approach to this problem is to follow the advice of the editorial writer in the Sunday Tribune who advocated that we all press vigorously for total funding the CUP while at the same time look at alternative sources of water such as underground water, etc. The growth of Utah should not be at the capricious whims of someone in the Oval office. Instead our water resources should be planned and acquired by us; with the help of the Federal government where appropriate and agreeable but borne through revenue bonds or whatever source of financing might be appropriate. LSTEV,,. IP THIS pCMSfiT W REALLY 3AS.imY SAY, THEN How Come, hdeodv & getting Excrrep? I would urge the Governor to empanel a n task force with charged determining alternative water sources or expand the role of the present commission in place. The wheels of the Potomac move too slowly. If we dont act someone may die of thirst and I'm certain it wont be anyone sitting in the Oval office. blue-ribbo- |