Reader Comments: The web would not accept this letter to the Editor.

Dan Haapala 10 months, 2 weeks ago

This was my comment preceeding the Holiday forthcoming. Has the home of the Brave and the Land of Free....Died? On Wednesday we'll celebrate the 236th anniversary of the signing of the document that pledged our lives be dedicated to freedom. The Freedom was not before granted to people because a ruling class of indulged individuals believed they were more entitled than most. In 1776, you were part of the hierarchy of entitled citizens, or part of the workng class that supported them. Now before you get the impression that it's liberals against conservatives, let me post that 1776 America had been at war for more than a year because they believed that what a man produced he should be allowed to keep. The King didn't agree. If this is printed on Tuesday the 3rd, then take the time to re-read the Declaration of Indepence. See why the people revolted and what they were willing to pay for their rebellion. On Wednesday, instead of hot dogs and burgers, baseball and badmitton, the focus should be about America. This course we are on is not us. Not who we are. We are stand up and take control of ourselves and be responsible to our fellow man. We are the hand up to a world in need. We are the righteous indignation oppossing oppressors of freedom and will fight to right the wrong. We believe that right is strength and wrong is weakness. That right and wrong are from the inner most part of ourselves and comes from God. I will celebrate the Declaration because I know the cost and believe it to be the most noble effort on Earth.

Tom Garrett 10 months, 2 weeks ago

You're right, Dan.

Never until I began reading the history of the English Parliament, and began looking into the laws that are made in others countries--Australia is a prime example--did I realize how much the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights in particular, mean to us.

It may be true that when men and women of fair mind join together to make laws they are unlikely to do things which are deliberately cruel or oppressive, but without a written code of laws telling them where they cannot stray they ARE likely to regulate matters which fall within the natural rights of the individual. It would make your hair stand on end to see how casually the Aussies just swept up all the arms in the nation and destroyed them. It was not so much what they did, which was horrendous enough, but how they disarmed an entire people, calmly saying that the people should place their faith in their leaders, not in the ability to change things by taking up arms if they did not like what they were given. That is one of the scariest things I have ever read. And reading the discussions in the English parliament as they regulate religion as though it were the natural province of king and parliament would shake you to your very foundations. Parliament can go anywhere, for any reason, and regulate anything.

I'll say it again:

"The most glorious words that can be spoken about this nation of ours, the most wonderful words, the most incredible words, words which were once impossible to say anywhere on this planet are these:

We Are A Nation Of Laws!"

Pat Randall 10 months, 2 weeks ago

But why so many stupid and not needed laws? There should be a house cleaning on a lot of them. From the top, federal on down to Payson and subdivisions. Especially the ones that are seldom enforced if at all unless someone has a grudge against someone. Complaint driven enforcement should be abolished.

Tom Garrett 10 months, 2 weeks ago

"But why so many stupid and not needed laws?"

Must be a quota system. The more stupid unnecessary people we have in Washington, the more...."

"There should be a house cleaning on a lot of them. From the top, federal on down to Payson and subdivisions."

I agree with you, Pat.

There are two things missing from our Constitution. One is, of course, citizen initiative, which would add a fourth branch of the government.

The other thing is something I've been asking for since I was 16 or 17 years old. I always wondered why we had laws that even at that age I knew were unconstitutional. It was so obvious. Then I found out that until someone challenges a law in court it just goes on screwing everything up.

That's wrong. Every law, after it is passed, but before it becomes effective, should be screened by a non-partisan group that first makes sure that it is constitutional. If that were done, I'm willing to bet that ten to fifteen percent of the laws passed would never make it into the books. That's especially true at the state level.

I'd like to see the group that checked state laws run by the feds, and the group that checked federal laws run by the states.