Amen to your Feb. 15 letter writer for chastising Congress on wasting time with baseball and steroids. So why are members of Congress doing this?

Because it's easy! Steroids are illegal -- so there is no point to argue there. Steroids hurt people -- again, no point to argue. Coming out against steroid use for a congressman is a no brainer. It's a great sound byte opportunity.

Now the war in Iraq? Nobody has a clue how to get out of that mess. The economy? Let's see if we can just "debt" ourselves into fixing that. Health care? Ranks up there with Iraq in trying to come up with a solution. And, so on.

No elected official wants to go on the record or CNN with sound bytes on those hot potatoes because coming up with a solution is nearly impossible.

But baseball and steroids? That one can get you noticed in a positive way. Why Congress is simply saving apple pie and the American way!

JANET BATES, EAGAN

A teachable moment or two St. Cloud State University is an institution of higher education. If the students there think it's "stupid that the school's making such a big fuss about swastikas," as a recent article stated, maybe the university should make 20th-century history required coursework for all students. After learning about the murderous, racist history of the symbol, maybe they'll decide it's worth "making a big fuss" after all.

TRACI PARMENTER, MINNEAPOLIS

D.C. handgun ban didn't work As a retired Carver County deputy, I was surprised to read the twisted logic of Scott Knight, the current chief of police in Chaska ("D.C. gun law repeal will make us less safe," Feb. 14). His letter's underlying theme seems to be that only police should have guns. Facts are stubborn things and they don't add up to support Knight's assertions.

In the early '90s Washington, D.C., was know as the "murder capital of the U.S." In 1991 there were 482 homicides in the city with a population of 600,000. That is a rate of 81/100,000. The rate started to drop in 1993 due to urban development whereby the beleaguered parts of D.C. were bought up and re-modeled by young professionals. The crime rate dropped as those who engaged in it were forced out by upscale development. All the while the D.C. handgun ban was in place!

The simple fact is that the presence of guns alone does not incite violent crime -- it is the intent. Fairfax County in Virginia neighbors D.C., has twice the population and one-twentieth the homicide rate. You can lawfully possess a handgun in Fairfax County. In 2005, Fairfax County had 2/100,000 (20 total) murders and D.C. had 39/100,000 (195 total) population. In 2006 D.C.'s rate lowered to 29/100,000.

The upcoming Supreme Court decision will not strike down "reasonable" gun laws as Knight suggests. The D.C.'s handgun law was an outright banning of their ownership since 1975. Knight leaps to the point that the upcoming court decision will eliminate background checks, safety training and local control. He is grandstanding. There is no intent to eliminate any "common-sense" measures. The court will rule on the right of a lawful citizen to possess a handgun under the Second Amendment in the District of Columbia.

Evidently Knight supports the total handgun ban in D.C. even though the facts demonstrate it did not work. His citing of the various "police groups" as some sort of solidarity indicator is laughable. High-ranking police officials tend to drift from reality as they focus on keeping or increasing their power. They become politicians with a badge and gun.

JOE POLUNC JR., COLOGNE

Barroom theater and the legal loophole Many bar owners have lost more than 50 percent of their business since the statewide smoking ban took effect. However, thanks to a poorly written legislation and the keen eye of attorney Mark Benjamin, these same bar owners may once again taking center stage and lighting up the their cash registers ("To smoke or not to smoke? Barroom thespians find the play's the thing," Feb. 15).

If you're a smoker, take a walk down to your local pub to join the Guiness Troupe. Learn to act and remember, this role will require smoking. If you're a nonsmoker, odds are you will not be selected for a role. Don't take the rejection personally; just because you are not selected to perform, doesn't mean you have a right to stop the production.

JEREMY ARCHIBALD, ST. PAUL

He calls that governing? After listening to Gov. Tim Pawlenty's State of the State speech last week, here's what I came away with. Due to his pressing engagements elsewhere, the singular extent of communication and negotiations with the Legislature this session will be through his veto pen.

The governor fails understand that he has to back his rhetoric and ideas with something besides threats. The duty for which he was elected was to govern Minnesota -- it looks to me like he's given up on that.

GREG HRUBY, ROSEVILLE