Gaining ground around guns demands facts, not rhetoric
You did a disservice to the good rabbi by not providing some fact-checking for him so that he would have his statistics correct on the number of actual mass shootings (“We must find common ground on gun safety,” Opinion, Feb. 25). In order to have a comprehensive and reasoned dialogue on the Second Amendment, gun ownership – including correctly identifying “assault rifles” – and mental health, we need to deal in facts rather than in rhetoric containing false statements that contribute nothing more than inflaming the passions of both sides.
WILLIAM ANDERSON, ALPHARETTA
Common sense applies to 2nd Amendment too
Question for the gun lobby: Why does common sense help us interpret the First Amendment but not the Second? Under the First Amendment, we can criticize the president, but common sense says we cannot shout “fire” in a crowded theater, even though speech is involved in both situations. Similarly, we can preach the gospel from whatever text we choose, but common sense does not allow us to sacrifice live animals on altars, even if both can be called religious practice. But where is common sense when we interpret that the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms means anyone can bring any weapon, including an AR-15, anywhere? Such an interpretation is not in the actual words of the Second Amendment, nor in its historical origins. Final question: If we can carry weapons anywhere, why doesn’t the gun lobby advocate for allowing guns in courtrooms and airplanes?
JOHN POOLER, DORAVILLE
Columnist’s insights helped this reader
I found Mona Charen’s balanced view, “Is Trump guilty, or does he just look and act guilty?” (Opinion, Feb. 25) a thought-provoking, logical, well-presented and most likely correct analysis of certain current events. To have my thoughts provoked is why I read the paper, and this piece is a fine example of what journalism can do. It should not try to give me what it thinks I want to read, but instead dig down and grope for what may be the truth. Good job, Mona Charen.
JIM MAHAFFEY, ATLANTA
Mindfulness needed to end distracted driving
It isn’t just smart phones – it’s also the plethora of distracting features in today’s automobiles that compete for the driver’s attention. It takes unselfishness and a determined mindfulness to ignore them, stay off the phone, and stay focused on the task at hand – driving as though your life, and the lives of others, depends on it. Bill Torpy quotes a guy who says (with a smile, no less), “It will take me getting a ticket to break my behavior” (“A driver cell phone crackdown shouldn’t be a tough call,” AJC.com, Feb. 26). I suggest substituting “killing someone” for “getting a ticket” and then re-consider – and at least wipe the smile off your face. It’s no laughing matter.
DAN COWLES, CUMMING
Ga. right to pursue criminal justice reform
Stacey Abrams’s concerns about Georgia’s costly reliance on money bail is aligned with a bipartisan national effort to end the practice as it currently exists. Keeping people in jail because they are too poor to post money bond is deeply out of step with American principles. Gov. Nathan Deal’s seven-year effort to reform Georgia’s criminal justice system is addressing problems with the bail system in this legislative session. We urge all of the candidates for governor to commit to continue this important work to bring equity and fairness to Georgia’s justice system.
ANDREA YOUNG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ACLU OF GEORGIA
About the Author
