Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
High-capacity weapons
must be banned
Re: “At least 22 dead in Maine shooting” (Page A2, Oct. 26).
Eighteen dead in Maine. Twenty-one in Uvalde. Six hundred dead and 2,700 wounded in one year. And it all adds up to 19,000 dead or wounded by mass shootings since 2015.
Only in the United States of America; no other country warrants these horrible numbers unless they are at war. Our Constitution states we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; “life” is of the highest priority in this statement since the other two don’t apply if the first doesn’t exist.
People will always have motivations to use these weapons, whether they are due to racial or political ideologies or mental illness, so banning them is the only true option.
Richard James
San Jose
Church views on gender
ideology are ignorant
I am disgusted at recent preachings of both the Catholic Church and other Christian churches. Specifically, I refer to the letter to Catholics from Bishops Cordileone and Barber which explicitly opposes gender ideology. Their letter complains that gender ideology promotes “a notion of gender identity which is left to the choice of the individual.”
Think about that. Who would ever, in our culture, “choose” to be gay or transgender when being so brings down upon them so much hate and discrimination, particularly from the churches and church people?
People are who nature made them to be; they did not “choose” any more than I chose to be heterosexual.
Don Barnby
Menlo Park
Clinton, Cheney have
chops for 2-state bid
With the “slings and arrows” coming from every direction all the time, who in the entire world would volunteer to assume the legacy-destroying job of finding a two-state solution?
Would any volunteers have the knowledge, experience, reputation, courage and willingness to self-immolate to find a solution? Would any volunteers have a body of achievements and the principles to quiet the noise, reduce the heat and dissect the issues to induce the parties to approach a solution?
Only two people in the world have the knowledge, experience, reputation, selflessness and the chops to take on the job — Hillary Clinton and Liz Cheney.
Along with all their other attributes, you can count on them to never quit.
Jim Hamm
Los Gatos
One can’t turn the
other cheek to Hamas
Re: “When we lose sight of our shared humanity” (Page A7, Nov. 3).
Israel turning the other cheek would only increase the overall loss of life because Hamas is on a Jihad to destroy Israel and all Jewish people. Israel is at the forefront of a far wider war being waged against the West by Iran’s radical proxies Hamas and Hezbollah.
Israel is now forced to defend itself against Hamas’ recent unprovoked attack that killed about 1,400 people. It is Hamas that chose to weaponize tunnels under apartment buildings and hospitals in Gaza to maximize Gazan deaths. This strategy is designed to turn Western media coverage against Israel for attacking civilians, and it seems to be working.
Ed Kahl
Woodside
Evidence shows
Hamas ill-serves Gaza
How about a more balanced approach to reporting on the Israel-Hamas conflict?
Page 1 contains the article “Israel steps up Gaza air, ground attacks” (Oct. 28) and details the terrible plight of the Palestinians, while many may miss the Page 4 report that “As Palestinians scrounge for and food and water, Hamas sits on rich trove of supplies.”
Based on the info on Page 4, Hamas represents about 2% of the population of Gaza, yet they are driving 98% of the population into ruin. How much less suffering would there be if the supplies hoarded by Hamas were applied to the 98% of Gazans? How much might Gaza have prospered had the supplies and money diverted by Hamas to tunnels and terrorism been applied to above-the-ground infrastructure?
Hamas may be the leader of the Palestinians in Gaza, but it does not serve them well.
Daniel Lee
San Jose
Climate offers chance
for bipartisanship
Re: “Far-right speaker threatens climate fight” (Page A8, Oct. 29).
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Mestry that bipartisan solutions to the climate crisis are needed, and, like him, worry that climate skeptic Mike Johnson will thwart that effort.
But I don’t think that conservative preferences for limiting government regulations and prioritizing economic growth stand in the way of reducing carbon pollution. A good example was given in a recent opinion column: a price on carbon with the fee distributed back equally to all Americans (HR 5744). This approach uses the free market to help save the climate while growing the economy.
Bipartisan policies do exist that would satisfy the political objectives of both conservatives and liberals. Let’s make sure Congress uses them.
Dean Shough
Newark
