published Monday, March 18th, 2013

Guns aren't declining; owners just smarter and other letters to the editors

Guns aren't declining; owners just smarter

I believe the article in Sunday's Times Free Press, "Share of homes with guns shows four-decade decline," to be mistaken. Gun ownership has not declined from 50 percent in the 1970s to an estimated 35 percent in 2012. What actually has happened is this: Big government and the liberal news media have caused more gun owners to become smarter and to respond falsely to such surveys asking questions about their household's ownership of firearms.

As more gun owners realize what is happening, the trend for gun ownership will continue to increase, while the surveys will indicate otherwise. If I owned any guns, I'd bet half of my collection that I'm right.


Who notices our city is crumbling?

David Cook and Dalton Roberts tell Times Free Press readers what actually is going on in Chattanooga.

The city continues to grow, but the foundation is crumbling. The spark that used to be there, beginning in the late 1980s when urban revitalization and renewal started, has faded. The "Scenic City" exists, but the attitude that created it has somehow been lost. Once proud portions of the city have become gang-ruled; citizen participation in the political process has been reduced to less than 20 percent. Trust in political leadership and law enforcement is dwindling.

With the exception of Dalton Roberts and David Cook, who so eloquently tell it like it is, the media seems reluctant to move away from unfortunate political correctness and tackle the issues that are causing the foundation of Chattanooga to erode. Let's find that spark, again, so this beautiful and otherwise proud city can remain upright and honest.

RICHARD HUGHES, Cleveland, Tenn.

Democrats fabricated the 'war on women'

Rhetorical question: At what point are artistic license and journalistic freedom accountable to the truth? Clay Bennett's depiction of two drones, one Democratic, the other Republican, the former waging war on terrorism and the latter waging war on women, crosses any reasonable distinction between fact and fiction.

"War on women" became a Democratic campaign slogan about a year ago, coinciding with law student Sandra Fluke's fabrications about the cost of her birth control pills. Not only were her claims about the need for government to mandate employer provision of contraception and abortifacients spurious, but there was never any substance attached to the so-called war. It was a smear campaign aided and abetted by many in the media, including now our own Mr. Bennett. It was to the Republicans' shame that they allowed the ridiculous charges to go unanswered.

So, who's on the side of women? Is it the conservatives who offer free prenatal and postnatal services through various nonprofit agencies, or is it Planned Parenthood which shows profits in the tens of millions while collecting federal money in the hundreds of millions?

GARY LINDLEY, Lookout Mountain, Ga.

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
Easy123 said...


Look up comments about rape from Rick Santorum, Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock, Paul Ryan, and Tom Smith.

Which Representatives and Senators didn't vote in favor of the Violence Against Women Act?

Which Representatives and Senators didn't vote in favor of the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act?

Which party is trying to put outrageous restrictions on abortions?

Which party is trying to make it more difficult for women to obtain proper contraception?

Conservatives are not on the side of women, sir. All of the facts are against you.

March 18, 2013 at 1:50 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Mr. Lindley, you need to find some real news instead of that fabricated land of lies fed to you daily by right-wing talking heads. Here's some facts, try to digest. 1) Republicans not only want to reduce women's access to abortion care, they're actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven't yet. Shocker. 2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to "accuser." But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain "victims." 3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.) Never mind that it's the law of the land and has been for decades. 4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids. 5) In Congress, Republicans have a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life. 6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids' preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working. 7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool. 8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens. 9) Congress just voted for a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country. 10) And if that wasn't enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can't make this stuff up).

March 18, 2013 at 6:37 a.m.
shen said...

Richard Hughes said.. The city continues to grow, but the foundation is crumbling. The spark that used to be there, beginning in the late 1980s when urban revitalization and renewal started, has faded.

Mr. Hughes, that spark was solely based on gentrification. NOT revitalization. The sneaky plans to gentrify, under the pretense of revitalizing, contributed greatly to the deterioration of targeted communities. The plan was to round up all the poor and scatter them to points unknown, like weeds. Then seed the area with more acceptables to the liking. But humans are not so predictable. You just can't send the law in to force people out of their homes and places they've lived for decades. In some communities, the ties go back well over a century. It's the deceitful and divisive practices at attempts to gentrify that has caused the foundation to crumble. You now have neighbors living side by side who no longer even speak to one another, because of what was done to them. Or neihbors who will speak to you in passing in the daylight, then call the law on that same neighbor while walking after dark to report a suspicious character, because they don't recognize the person as one of their own neighbors living on the very same street. That's the darker side of what so-called revitalization stirred up. An exclusive social club, where only a few would be welcome.

March 18, 2013 at 9:08 a.m.
conservative said...

Of course you are right Mr Burke but if it makes Liberals feel better I see it is as winner for both sides.

I do wonder why Liberals don't wonder why gun and ammo shelves are close to empty.

March 18, 2013 at 10:18 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.