Previous Page 2 of 3 Next

Continued: Readers Write (Aug. 24): Road construction, Vikings stadium, NSA, marriage, gun rights, sex offenders, food assistance, grammar, Mubarek

  • Article by:
  • Last update: August 24, 2013 - 10:07 AM


• • •


Schools should notify parents of dangers

I own a gun. I believe in the right to bear arms. It’s in the Constitution. I believe in freedom of speech. It’s also in the Constitution. Occasionally I will use an expletive. But I limit those occasions to when hammer meets thumb or in the company of other expletive-spewing comrades. If I’m walking in a park and pass a stranger, I keep my verbiage social. I could use more colorful language, but I know that others would be offended. I know that public display of guns disturbs some people. I keep my gun in my house. I could carry it in public, but just because I can doesn’t mean I should.


• • •

The debate over guns in the State Capitol ignores the issue of schoolchildren who regularly tour there. Parents expect that their children are safely separated from guns when they are inside school buildings. When their children are brought to the Capitol, there’s usually no warning that they will be in a location where guns may be present. Not only are guns allowed, but some grown men feel unsafe in the building unarmed. At a minimum, parents should be notified in advanced.

AL LARSON, Bloomington

• • •


Why should any of them ever be set free?

Those convicted of brutalizing children should never again walk free, especially repeat offenders (“2 sex offenders may go free,” Aug. 20). There is something very wrong when we consider releasing violent offenders yet keep low-level drug mules locked up. It doesn’t appear that the public welfare is being considered but rather the viability of a program that has not released anyone in two decades.

PAM HOPF, Minneapolis

• • •


Cuts to program would hurt those most in need

Affordable nutrition to low-income families is facing a crisis in America. The Recovery Act of 2009, which is scheduled to end Nov. 1, was enacted in order to boost the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). As a student studying social work, many families that I’ve had the opportunity to work with rely heavily on their already small amount of SNAP benefits to keep food on the table. For families and individuals already struggling to make ends meet using the existing nutritional programs available, a cut of $29 a month would be devastating.

  • related content

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters