Nancy Merritt writes that she doesn't own a gun, but she might want one if threatened by a bad guy.
To the Editor:
Justin Petaccio's recent letter, "Gun availability needs restrictions," notes that guns don't kill people, people kill people. Yet, he states guns are too easy to obtain and that tighter restrictions are needed to prevent murders.
I guess that means the writer thinks all guns are obtained legally and that the sole reason to have a gun is to cause harm.
I was in Lowe's recently, asking for the best, strongest lock for our front door. Locks are for honest people, the clerk told me. No matter how strong or how good a lock is, a bad guy will find a way in if he wants to rob you badly enough. Hmmm.
I am not a gun owner. I was not raised around guns. Yet, common sense tells me in the face of danger, if my children are at risk or my family is in harm's way, I would be the first to grab a gun. My intent would be to kill, if that was the only way to protect my children. If facing a bad guy, I wouldn't want my right to have a gun restricted in any way.
After every tragedy, we hear calls for gun control, but nothing about addressing the root problems leading to bad acts committed with guns. No one seems willing to take on difficult societal issues like mental illness, drugs, poverty and no-parent households. These problems most always surface long before violent acts are committed, and there is no one-size fits all solution like, "Control the guns!"
I firmly believe that criminals will always have access to the tools needed for their trade, and that no law or restriction will prevent tragedy when a bad guy is out to cause harm. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Nancy Merritt
Mullica Hill
Hope for U.S. Rep. Donald Norcross' challenger
To the Editor:
A column in a Philadelphia newspaper recently profiled Alex Law, who intends to challenge U.S. Rep. Donald Norcross, D-1st Dist., for the congressional nomination in the 2016 Democratic primary.
Law's team's strategy is to take it to the people, knocking thus far on the on the doors of 11,637 district homes, and having conversations more than 2,500 voters.
MORE: Democrat challenger for Norcross denied party data
I'm a registered independent who would love to vote for Law. But first, I want to know if his "team" has any plans to enrich itself off the people of South Jersey.
The incumbent is the brother of Democratic power broker George Norcross III, whose "family" relationships include Cooper University Hospital (he is board chairman), a board seat on Holtec International (which is moving to Camden with state tax credits as incentives), and the executive chairmanship of the Connor Strong & Buckelew health benefits firm. These enterprises have received hundreds of millions of dollars in public contracts, grants from the Delaware River Port Authority and tax credits from the state Economic Development Authority - which is New Jersey's newest ATM for the politically connected.
Donald Norcross basically "inherited" his congressional seat after U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews resigned in the midst of a federal investigation into questionable campaign fund spending practices.
Before Law gets my vote, I want to know how many of on his "team" are looking handouts from New Jersey taxpayers. I'm not sure how many "public servants" we can support.
If Law is an honest politician - that mythical creature rumored to exist, but never seen in New Jersey - he could always borrow a phrase from Richard Nixon and state, "I am not a crook."
Carol Rhodes
Barnsboro
Send a letter to the editor of South Jersey Times at sjletters@njadvancemedia.com
