Letters - Wednesday

GUNS ON CAMPUS
Regents correct to keep arms out of college classrooms

As one of those critically injured in the Virginia Tech shootings, I disagree with The Gazette's Aug. 19 Our View, "Regents should lift CU gun ban." I am now part of an organization, Students for Gun Free Schools, which opposes the introduction of concealed weapons onto college campuses in Colorado or anywhere else.

The editorial stated that anyone who thinks that college gun bans prevent crime and mass shootings is "sadly confused." A quick look at the statistics, however, would indicate that perhaps The Gazette is confused. A study by the U.S. Department of Education found that the homicide rate at postsecondary education institutions was 0.07 per 100,000 of enrollment in 1999. By comparison, the overall homicide rate in the United States was 5.7 per 100,000 persons overall in 1999, and 14.1 per 100,000 for persons ages 17 to 29.

The fact is that despite some horrific high-profile shootings, America's colleges and universities remain some of the safest places in the entire country, in part because of strict policies that have kept firearms off of the overwhelming majority of campuses.

The Gazette is right about one thing, however. Gun laws are indeed to blame for the tragedies at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois - the pathetically weak gun laws that allowed individuals with long and established histories of mental illness to legally buy guns.

The Virginia Tech Review Panel also failed to see the logic in The Gazette's argument that concealed carry permit holders - none of whom are required to have more than a day of training to get their permits -are well qualified to serve as "plain-clothed security guards." The panel instead noted that, "If numerous people had been rushing around with handguns outside Norris Hall on the morning of April 16, the possibility of accidental or mistaken shootings would have increased significantly," and recommended that guns be banned on campus grounds.

We should be careful not to overreact and pass laws based on a fear that is unsubstantiated. To give a select few the ability to "fight back" while putting public safety in general at risk is not what most students and faculty in America want.

We at Students for Gun Free Schools respectfully ask the regents of the University of Colorado to uphold their current gun-free policy, which has worked and kept their academic community safe.

Elilta Habtu, Woodbridge, Va.

Disarmed students, faculty at mercy of violent attackers

I sent an e-mail to all of the CU regents a week ago urging them to seriously consider permitting students and faculty of the CU system who have valid concealed carry permits to carry on campus and in class. Not one replied.

Their decision simply violates the U.S. constitutional right of citizens to protect themselves and leaves students and faculty sitting ducks. What good is a right to protect yourself when that right is proscribed in the very places that recent history has shown are high-risk areas? Perhaps there is a connection here.

I would venture to say that some are carrying in defiance of the ban and are willing to risk debating the issue after the fact. At least they have a fighting chance of being around after a random attack to debate the issue with the regents.

How else do the regents plan to protect their charges?

Even arming the campus security guards is insufficient. The old saw that when seconds count the police are only minutes away is an old saw because it is true. This is not an indictment of the campus or city police. It is simply not their duty to physically protect everyone at all times. They cannot. That is our own personal responsibility. This is why the drafters of the Constitution codified that right. How can what amounts to a school board rule trump the U.S. Constitution?

Kyle C. Akers, Colorado Springs

INTOLERANT MANITOU
Despite Web site's claims, Christians unwelcome at festival

My husband and I decided to take our four children to last weekend's Mountain Music Festival in Manitou Springs.

What we expected to hear was great music. Instead, what we got on the opening night was a bunch of religious bigotry and silly liberal political diatribes. I wish we had not taken our children.

Through his comments and a number of songs, Bud Ford of The Dulcimer Shop and his Cripple Creek band made fun of Christians, blasphemed the Christian faith and assumed we were all Democrats in the audience anxiously awaiting Barack Obama's vice-presidential choice. He then proceeded to sing a song about we should all "love" each other, after insulting those with whom he disagrees.

We were stunned at such intolerant, immature behavior and so we left.

We have never attended a public event or concert where Christian families were made to feel completely excluded and unwelcomed by the performers on stage.

People in Manitou Springs brag about how much more progressive they are than those of us in Colorado Springs, but it's a myth. Religious bigotry is alive and well in Manitou.

Little did we know that certain families were unwelcome at their annual music festival. Its Web site says the festival is "for all people who love music." What a joke.

We won't bother going next year or patronizing festival sponsors The Dulcimer Shop and The Cliff House.

Caia Hoskins, Colorado Springs

DRUG WAR
Ending prohibition could lower incidence of drug use in nation

We're reluctant to legalize drugs, because if we did the price would go down and use would go up ("Losing endless war on drugs," Our View, Aug. 25). But there's an offsetting effect. There would no longer be drug pushers looking for more customers, saying, "Just try it once. It won't cost you a cent."

In the long run, drug usage might even go down. Holland's experience suggests it would.

Clifford E. Horton, Colorado Springs

COLOR-BLIND VOTERS
Jones wrong on reasons Obama draws support from electorate

If Ed Jones believes Barack Obama's success is only about race, what happened to Presidents Jesse Jackson and Alan Keyes ("Obama's success proof nation far from color blind," Other Voices, Aug. 24)? Jones shouldn't insult me or the rest of black America by insinuating that we are not smart enough to look at the issues and decide our vote based on where a candidate stands on the issues.

If Jones did a second of research he would have seen that blacks were overwhelmingly supporting Hillary Clinton at the start of this campaign. I guess it's OK if blacks or whites all vote for a white candidate, but if they support a black one it has to be because of his race.

The Constitution spells out the qualifications to be president. The American people then decide who gets elected based on their perception of the candidate. Obama's message has captured the inherent good spirit of Americans. He has inspired them to want to be even better as a country than we are today.

Jones repeated the line that Obama "has no legislative accomplishments," but the record shows he was instrumental in ethics reform, control of nuclear weapons and veterans benefit reform. As a matter of fact, Obama has a better voting record supporting veterans than does John Mc-Cain. Obama has been getting six times the contributions from military personnel as McCain.

While the Republicans are busy making personal attacks, Obama has been busy talking about the issues. McCain appears to be saying "vote for me because I was shot down and was a POW."

As a military veteran myself I have always admired his service. Twenty five years in the Air Force has reinforced my belief in "integrity ffrst." McCain lost my vote after he went back on his word of running a clean campaign and always giving "straight talk."

One look at the non-partisan Web site factcheck.org shows just how far off the tracks McCain has gone with his supposed "straight talk express."

America needs someone with integrity, not a supposed maverick who says anything to get elected.

B. Dewayne Brown, Colorado Springs