In Case You Missed It
Boulderganic Fall 2009
Student Guide 2009
Boulder Weekly Sweet 16 Anniversary
Summer Scene 2009
Best of Boulder 2009
Annual Manual 2009
Newspaper of the Future
Kids Camp Guide 2009
Wedding Marketplace 09
Student Guide 2008
Best of Boulder 2008
Annual Manual 2008
Join Our Mailing List
• See Jim Hightower
• Danish Plan
Nonviolence vs. violence
(Re: “The break-in,” cover story, July 2.) Pamela White’s sharing of her personal experiences led us to examine our commitments to nonviolent responses to violence. The commitment to provide a safe environment to those who depend on us and whom we love cannot be discounted.
It occurs to us that it is much easier in our society to know how to react to danger violently — television news stories teach us over and over every day. But responding nonviolently takes practice and skill. How many times a day can one learn these techniques by watching TV? Usually never. Can we make learning nonviolence a central part of our society? Let’s do it together!
Dick and Gretchen Williams/Boulder
Blown away by B-dub
(Re: “Second-guessing the Second Amendment,” cover story, July 2.) I never write letters to newspapers, but I just had to this time. When I saw the handgun on the cover of your July 2-8 issue, I grabbed a copy, figuring that I’d get a laugh out of what I’d expected to be an extreme liberal slant on gun-ownership.
As a longtime gun owner and defender of the Second Amendment, the last place that I thought I’d find a fair, unbiased view of firearms was in a Boulder newspaper. Boy, was I wrong. What a breath of fresh air to read the articles and only find one of them — Tom Mauser’s — to be (understandably) biased and anti-gun. I can’t fault Tom, considering what happened to his child, to feel the way he does. But the remainder of the columns related to firearms just blew me away (pun intended). I’m saving this copy to hand out at my next NRA meeting.
A voice and a legacy
(Re: “A living voice,” Buzz, July 9.) It was a simple and profound joy to read your article/interview with Joan Baez this morning. Thank you!
Laura Culley/Fort Worth, Tex.
Doctors lose their rights
Let’s say you are a factory worker operating a box-making machine. At the end of the week instead of getting a paycheck, you are told the government has made the receiving of boxes a “right.” Therefore all people are to receive boxes whenever they want them without having to pay for them, and you, the box-maker, are to provide them.
Let’s say you are a salesman selling men’s clothing. At the end of two hard weeks of selling, you are expecting $2,000 in commissions, but your employer tells you the government has decreed that all people are to receive help with the purchase of their clothing by right. What this means is that your compensation is now subject to a government board established for the purpose of ensuring all clothing salesmen are only paid what is fair and equitable, and fair and equitable to this board means you are getting $1,000 in commissions.
If you think this is absurd, then please tell me how these two examples differ from what is currently happening in the health-care industry? Because the people of this land have decreed through their elected representatives that health care is a “right.”
Unfortunately, this means the doctors, nurses, hospitals and everyone else associated with the medical profession will soon lose their right to determine how much they can charge for the property and services they rightfully own or to the terms of their employment.
Russell W. Shurts/Centennial
Back to top