Letters to the Editor

Constitutional rights have no expiration date

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

The letter from Walter Lawrence, "Richmond physician urges handgun controls," is a perfect example of how far this country has strayed from its constitutional principles. In his letter, Lawrence states that proponents of handgun rights "cite rights outlined earlier in the Constitution."

Rights outlined in the Constitution have no expiration. They are God-given and inalienable. I suggest that Lawrence include the Federalist Papers in his reading regimen where Alexander Hamilton in Paper No. 29 and James Madison in No. 46 provide background to the wording and purpose of the Second Amendment. It most certainly was not intended only "for rifles of militiamen," as Lawrence writes.

Lawrence wrote that "gun control is completely unrelated to the basic tenets of either political party." Rights afforded individuals through the Constitution supersede the whims and positions of either political party. If Lawrence has issues with current gun rights, I suggest he refer to Article 5 of the Constitution, where he will find the process for amending the rights afforded to all in the Second Amendment. Until then, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Stephen Halsey.

Richmond.

Handgun legislation baffles reader

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

I find significant irony, make that tragedy, that details of the handgun murder of a Hanover teenager appeared in the same newspaper edition that was headlined by a General Assembly Senate committee's recommendation to repeal the state's one-handgun-a-month purchase limit.

I remain unconvinced of the benefit of owning a single handgun. I remain baffled about the need to acquire multiple weapons within a 30-day span.

Bill Craig.

Richmond.

Stress self-respect over self-esteem

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

Robin Beres wrote in her witty and timely Commentary column: "A 5-year-old gets a trophy whether she hits a grand slam or spends her time sitting in the outfield watching ants crawl."

These poor children growing up in a world stuffed with plastic tokens of self-esteem and no concrete symbols of self-respect. Self-control and self-discipline have been replaced by instant gratification. I don't think that the practice does very much of anything for the average youngster's esteem, but it must be numbingly frustrating for the child who actually excels at whatever sport or scholastic activity the little statuettes are being handed out.

Everyone is always a bridesmaid in a mediocre world. And they are all being cheated out of the exhilarating cycle of preparation and practice and high expectations. Praise and prizes should be at a premium and not handed out like empty calories to ruin an appetite for excellence. We should be showering our children with first-class self-respect instead of drowning them in second-class self-esteem.

Greta Shefers.

Chester.

Misconduct marginalizes Occupy Richmond

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

Occupy Richmond is again petitioning City Hall for the right to endlessly camp on city property — chiefly Kanawa Plaza. The movement argues that the First Amendment provides the right to permanently occupy public space.

It is wrong. The First Amendment protects the right to free speech and peaceful assembly. It does not protect the right to take over and trash public property, deny other citizens the use of that property and then have city services clean it up. This is exactly what happened last October.

As an American, I support Occupy Richmond's right to peacefully express political opinions. However, as a city resident, taxpayer and voter I am not in favor of giving any political organization the ability to hold hostage public property. Mayor Jones was right to evict Occupy Richmond from Kanawha Plaza when he did.

I also find disdainful Occupy Richmond's veiled attempt at intimidation when its members camped next to the mayor's home for six weeks. It was a cheap publicity stunt that resulted solely in the disruption of the day-to-day lives of other citizens. How would members of Occupy Richmond react if the local Tea Party camped next to one of their homes? Whatever democratic message Occupy Richmond wishes to express is marginalized by its members' very undemocratic conduct.

Lewis Mills.

Richmond.

Loving upbringing lasts forever

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

I thoroughly enjoyed reading Bob Rayner's warm-hearted story, "The decided advantage of a modest home."

Many of us who had "not much stuff" while growing up can relate to the home Rayner describes. More important than possessions were attentive parents and good neighbors to look after us.

For those so fortunate, it is well to be reminded of the life-long advantages such an upbringing and environment can foster. Thank you.

Irv Kenyon.

Ashland.