Letters to the Editor
Readers write about funding roadworks, mortgage bailouts, guns in national parks, and cricket.
Invest in public resources with public funds
Regarding Kathleen Sebelius and Andy Stern's May 7 Opinion piece, "Main Street, not Wall Street, should fix crumbling infrastructure": Yes indeed, why not tap our pension funds to rebuild our bridges, roads, schools, hospitals, protect our national parks, resources, and so forth? What a boost the pension funds would be to our national economy and American companies.
In response to Kathleen Sebelius and Andy Stern's recent Opinion piece on the US infrastructure: It's not whether, but when we repair our infrastructure, comprehensively and at a reasonable investment cost. Ms. Sebelius and Mr. Stern's proposal to fund this with public pension funds deserves actionable consideration. Now. Or we may await the tsunami of social pressure from increased fatalities on interstates.
Don't bail out failing mortgages
Regarding the May 8 article, "US on hook for subprime crisis?": So taxpayers such as myself will be saving the mortgage industry and private homeowners from foreclosure? The corrupt banks that lent money to people incapable of paying them back should go bankrupt. People who borrowed more than they could afford should lose their house. The housing market's correction is a good thing.
Gun licensees are responsible citizens
In response to your May 6 editorial, "Armed to kill in national parks?": Continuing a ban on carrying concealed weapons in national parks just because they are currently banned is a weak argument. Change is part of human nature. We change our minds all the time.
Continuing such a ban because there is little risk of injury by grizzly bears or a serious criminal assault in national parks is also a weak argument. If confronted by either, having a concealed weapon is an option that you might like to have.
The argument that concealed weapons in national parks could "escalate tense encounters" between visitors ignores the evidence that the men and women who have earned their concealed-carry permits rarely commit gun-related crimes.
Arguments that permitting concealed weapons in national parks will increase poaching are difficult to support. A high powered hunting rifle smuggled in the back of an SUV is a more effective tool for poaching than a snub-nosed revolver or military-style pistol that would typically be carried in a concealed holster.
The individuals in this nation who have earned their concealed-carry permits have demonstrated that they are responsible citizens and that they should be trusted to behave properly.
Traditional cricket, an acquired taste
Regarding the May 8 article, "The new face of cricket: fast, furious, and no time for tea": Americans may not enjoy cricket, but that does not make it an arcane sport. A careful analysis of the game reveals its superiority to almost every other sport. Every aspect of the game requires some level of skill, and even taking a run is a measured and calculated affair. It may be that society has lost its appetite for noncontact sports that depend on individual ability, fair play, respect for the opponent, etc. But I, for one, am glad that my 10-year-old is fond of cricket and its inherent values.
The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Because of the volume of mail we receive, we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number. Any letter accepted may appear in print or on our website, www.csmonitor.com. Mail letters to Readers Write and Opinion pieces to Opinion Page, 210 Massachusetts Avenue, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail letters to Letters and Opinion pieces to OpEd.