Classifieds Business Directory Jobs Real Estate Autos Legal Notices Forums Subscribe Archives
Today is April 20, 2014
home news sports feature opinionhappenings society obits techtips

Front Page » November 1, 2011 » Opinion » Letters to the Editor
Published 901 days ago

Letters to the Editor


Print PageEmail PageShareGet Reprints

Dear Editor:

While in the desert the weekend of Oct. 15, I looked toward the horizon for a glimpse of a familiar and beautiful landmark arch only to discover that it was no longer there. Not wanting to trust my eyesight, and hoping that I was just looking at an odd angle, I hiked the short distance to see if it was truly not there. It was not. In its place was emptiness and a pile of rubble kicked off below.

I am completely incensed with the continual destruction of natures beautiful treasures and the defacing and vandalism of the artifacts in the San Rafael Swell Area. Humanity can do so much better than to enact this level of destruction.

To me, the smashing of an arch is infinitely worse than any kind of poaching. Each natural rock formation occurs once and only once; it occurs only in that one particular place on Earth, and will never occur there again. Each one is like the last of it's species and when it is gone, it is extinct forever.

This destructive act is a complete disregard for nature and the geologic wonder and beauty of our area, as well as a complete disregard for humanity. Never again will anyone look to the horizon at this beautiful arch, or hike with their children and grandchildren to photograph it and wonder at the miraculous, delicate handicraft and artistry of Mother Nature.

Tina E. Allred, Huntington

Dear Editor:

This past week a couple of events turned my thoughts to the Second Amendment. The first was a notice that I received from the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification which stated that the fingerprints I submitted with my application for my Concealed Firearm Permit was deemed unreadable and that I would have to submit a new set. This notification also contained an admonition that reminded me that my permit was "provisional" on a "clean" criminal records check and that if the bureau didn't receive new fingerprints my permit would be "suspended".

The second event was an article I read stating that New Hampshire was joining with a number of other states in passing a law that would allow New Hampshire citizens to carry a firearm, concealed or open and whether loaded or unloaded, within the state without the need for a special permit but that the state would issue such permits on request by citizens in order to comply with concealed carry reciprocity agreements with other states.

My initial thought was "Why?" to both events.

The second amendment of the United States Constitution states "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." Notice that this sentence places no conditions or limitations on the right and includes the emphatic, unambiguous phrase " . . . shall not be infringed." On reading the constitution I find no element which explicitly nor implicitly gives any governmental body the authority to "interpret" any element of the constitution nor to change any element of the constitution outside of the mechanism provided in Article 5 (the amendment process).

Anti-gun proponents are quick to point out that the second amendment begins with the words "A well regulated Militia, . . . " and falsely propose that this indicates that the second wasn't meant for the average citizen but only applied to the "militia" hoping that you are ignorant of history.

If we review American history we find the reasoning for the second amendment in the writings of the architects of the constitution which reasonings are embodied in this quote by Thomas Jefferson "The constitutions of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of speech, freedom of property and freedom of the press."

Additionally we can look to acts which are contemporary to the constitution such as the Militia Act of 1792 which gives contemporary meaning to the word "militia". This act states, in part, ". . . That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, . . ."; in the 18th century life expectancy of males was 35-50 years dependent on locale of residency (I believe 41 years in the United States). So any reading of the act said every male citizen from adulthood (18 years of age) to near the farthest extent of expected life were required to be members of the "militia"; in other words the militia consisted of every adult male.

The act goes on to say ". . . That every citizen . . . . provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than 24 cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of power and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, 20 balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, . . ."

In other words the act said every male citizen must fit himself with the latest in firearms technology, with ammunitions, and accoutrements of service. This act was made a constitutional mandate for Congress to provide these arms, ammunitions, and accoutrements to every male citizen in Article 1 Section 8 of the constitution "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia . . . reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."

In today's world and in today's terms, contrary to anti-gun laws currently extent, this section requires that congress provide every male citizen with an assault weapon, ammunition, and such uniform items as is necessary to serve as a militiaman.

For more than 100 years the constitution, and in particular the Second Amendment, has been under attack and our rights under the Constitution have been correspondingly eroded and undermined. With respect to the Second Amendment the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968, and The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act as well as various state and local laws have, in my humble opinion and through the perverted "interpretations" by activist jurists, unlawfully and without benefit of the amendment process placed conditions on the Second Amendment of the Constitution and infringe on "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" and need to be repealed.

If the conditions and restrictions on gun purchasing, ownership, and carriage as embodied in these acts and statutes are truly the will of the majority of the American people then such conditions need to be implemented through the constitutionally established amendment process. In this vein I would encourage every Utahn who truly loves the constitution and wishes to reestablish constitutional rule in the United States do four things; first contact your state legislators and demand Utah enact a similar act as New Hampshire and other states with respect to concealed carry; second contact your national legislators and demand that they push repeal of the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968, and The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and a return to the original intent and scope of the Second Amendment; push for federal legislation that severely limits the judiciary's usurped authority to "interpret" the constitution, to amend the constitution from the bench, and to be the sole arbiters of the Constitution; and lastly to become active in the "Tea Party".

At 8 p.m. on Nov. 1 in the Ferron City Hall a number of individuals are going to meet to discuss the possibility of establishing a "Tea Party" branch in Castle Country. The Tea Party is not another political party; if you want to you can remain a Republican, a Democrat, or an Independent and still be a "Tea Partier".

The Tea Party is a grass roots movement composed of people who want to see the Constitution re-established and returned to its original intent, restore the originally envisioned balance between the three branches of government, push for state's rights and enforcement of the 10th Amendment, and support candidates who put America first above their own political ambitions. If you believe in these things join us on Nov. 1, you have nothing to lose and much to gain.

It would do us well to remember the words of Thomas Jefferson, "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one."

Lou Sansevero, Ferron

Vandalism to Native American rock art, is there a solution?

Dear Editor:

Three weeks ago, my son and his family visited from Oklahoma. My brother took them on a central Utah tour of the most beautiful scenery on the map.

I took them to a couple of Indian art sites close to home. I noticed that visitors have been etching their initials and such into these rocks,

Soon there will be no history for the generations to come.

Maybe the Utah historical society could take up collections for some solar powered cameras on these sites. I would be glad to donate. I am sure if the intruders are aware of cameras, they may not deface history.

Howard Barnes, Emery

Comments on article concerning Emery's post office meeting

Dear Editor,

An article by staff writer, Phil Fauver, regarding the community meeting held in Emery on Oct. 11 concerning the possible closing of the Emery Town Post Office appeared in the Oct. 18 edition of the Progress. The article was quite lengthy and, in general, informative.

I am a resident of Emery and sat in the front row at the community meeting. Yes indeed there was a lot of emotion being expressed by the townspeople and the level of frustration over the possible closing of our Post Office was high. We all vented our frustrations, feelings and opinions - one at a time in an orderly manner at a microphone in the front of the room.

Two individuals raised their voices to make their points but they were not overly loud or obnoxious. Indeed we did cheer and applaud whenever a friend or neighbor raised a valid point against closing our post office. And, yes indeed, we were as loud as we intended to be.

Never was the crowd "boisterous" nor did we ever "erupt". I find the inference to our behaving badly, being out-of-control or rude to our guests inaccurate and demeaning to Emery Town. The article implies that the people of Emery Town are ill-mannered hicks without a lick of intelligence or manners among us. The meeting was orderly and conducted by Mayor Mistie Christiansen with respect and decorum. Even the children were extremely well-behaved.

Suzi Cole, Emery

Downwinders victims-past, present, future

Editor,

Congressman Jim Matheson needs our help. He has been fighting for Carbon and Emery counties for a long time. He has Senator Orrin Hatch helping him now. Rep. Matheson is very aware of our unusual amount of cancer in our area, but he desperately needs our help. He is fighting right now to raise the compensation to $150,000 instead of just $50,000 as he realizes the heavy cost of cancer.

What I am asking each of you to do is write down every person you know that has developed cancer, either dead or living, even if they died somewhere else or developed cancer elsewhere, in either county. The high amount of radiation found in our soil, thus in our air, puts radiation in our bodies either way. Ask your friends and family to do the same thing. Not only will this be helpful to cancer victims and their families now, it will help future cancer victims, including your friends and families and you. Another thing it will help is when they present our numbers in Washington and let them know just how harmful having testing or storing, etc. really can be. Rep. Matheson wrote me a personal letter letting me know he can use all of the help possible.

You can write, fax, or email both Matheson and Hatch, but Matheson is the most active in taking it to Washington. If you only have time for one, but why not send it to all your representatives.

Please work hard on this project and it will help so many families. Another thing, the extra compensation would help both counties' economies. Don't wait, contact all your representatives now.

Maryla Adams, Elmo

Print PageEmail PageShareGet Reprints


Top of Page


 
Web Poll  
April 25, 2011
Do you you think the national deficit that Congress has been struggling with can be better solved by increasing taxes or by cutting spending?
Increasing taxes
(13.55%)
Cutting spending
(57.42%)
Combination of both
(25.95%)
Don't know or don't care
(3.08%)
1557 total votes

Opinion  
November 1, 2011
Recent Opinion
Quick Links
Subscribe via RSS
Related Articles  
Related Stories



Best viewed with Firefox
Get Firefox

© Emery County Progress, 2000-2008. All rights reserved. All material found on this website, unless otherwise specified, is copyright and may not be reproduced without the explicit written permission from the publisher of the Emery County Progress.
Legal Notices & Terms of Use    Privacy Policy    Advertising Info    FAQ    Contact Us
  RSS Feeds    News on Your Site    Staff Information    Submitting Content    About Us
z