Never surrender that right

Gun rights advocates claim a fundamental right to armed self-defense, while their opponents acknowledge only a privilege that can be limited or even eliminated by government for the good of society. Which side is right depends on the nature of human society. If human society is, like a pack of wolves, a collection of individuals whose lives are the means to the ends of the group, then a right to a weapon that enables the weak to resist the powerful would be harmful to those ends. But if human society is a collection of rational beings, each an end in himself, then a right to firearms declares that the physically powerful or criminally intentioned will not rule the innocent.

Gun banners claim they only want to eliminate certain weapons that are unnecessary for self-defense. But the only weapons that are unnecessary are those that can not be adequately focused on the aggressor and could therefore hurt other innocents. Automatic guns, bazookas, and nuclear bombs would fall into that category. Semi-automatic firearms, regardless of appearance or magazine capacity, would not.

A rational human being, unlike a wolf or an ant, has a right to his life. Since he has a right to his life, he has a right to defend his life. Since he has a right to self-defense, he has a right to the means of self-defense. A gun is the means. In a society that upholds human rights, an individual can delegate his self-defense to government when possible. But he can never surrender that right. To do so would be to surrender his humanity.

Jerry Varner

Colorado Springs

History and unarmed citizens

To all who wish to ban guns from the USA: Study history as it pertains to Hitler’s Germany, Russia after the Czar and all other regimes that disarmed their populations. Check out the results of the aftermath of what started as merely registering citizens guns. An unarmed citizenry is one easily placed under complete government control.

Robert Murphy

Colorado Springs

Lost any semblance of honesty

What does it say about the residents of our community or visitors to our community that for years hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of our own citizens and visitors have totally ignored the illegality of climbing the Manitou Incline? Shame on all of you!

The “No Trespassing” and “No Parking” signs were totally ignored. You parked wherever you found a space large enough for your vehicle. You walked right by the ‘No Trespassing’ signs as if they were not there. Too bad you blocked the right-of-way for neighborhood traffic and residents. Shame on all of you!

Where is the respect for property rights of the several owners of the real estate on which the incline is located? Respect be dammed … it’s a fun climb!

What would your reaction be is some stranger walked into your living room or back yard simply because he/she thought it would be a fun activity? Shame on all of you!

We, as a society, have apparently lost any semblance of honesty in our day-to-day activities. … We just rationalize our actions away in that universal excuse of “It doesn’t hurt anything!”

Don Laughlin

Colorado Springs

Work is not a dirty word

It is well to remember “equality comes with opportunity” Not by law nor government action. That being said I think it explains why I am a conservative, not a liberal. I have very little patience with those who do not take advantage of opportunities afforded to get an education or skills according to mental/physical abilities.

If you are uneducated and lack skills to fit into the workforce (long term) don’t expect to enjoy all the luxuries of life. I feel that many have come to except much, with little or no effort or sacrifice. Work is not a dirty word, it’s the pathway to achievement.

It’s become acceptable in our society today to voice the concept that those who achieve a degree of success and wealth are not contributing their fair share in this society. What is meant by fair share? Are those who work hard responsible to provide all the comfort of life for those who are content not to work?

In my day it was acceptable fact of life that people worked for a living. Don’t expect a “good living” without hard work. It’s well to remember education and skills are achieved by hard work and is rewarded by better living conditions. People who work hard and achieve success are not happy with having to provide for those who expect much with little or no effort. Work is not a bad word, it’s a fact of life.

If I am labeled a “heartless conservative,” it’s not so. … I am a realist. Sooner or later those who work for a living will tire of providing a living for those who labor under the impression you don’t have to work. In the real world you are expected to work for a living. Without a good education and skills to fit into the workforce, accept the fact you will qualify only for minimum wages.

Marvin D. Gardner

Colorado Springs

Another savings option

How much cost savings could the Post Office realize by eliminating walking mail routes?  Police Departments years ago eliminated foot patrols, except in special situations, because of cost. Even, though the foot patrols were a service that a lot of citizens and businesses still wanted.

Why can’t the Post Office eliminate 1,000’s of their walking (time and money consuming) routes with stops at a neighbor mail box? Has the post office ever discussed or considered such a money saving option?

There will remain some situations where a walking route would be needed, the same as police foot patrols. But, reducing the vast number of walking (time and money consuming) routes that the Post Office currently has could create a large financial savings for the Post Office. Or, is this a “sacred cow” that the Post Office does not even want to have mentioned or discussed?

Richard Lans

Colorado Springs