Winston-Salem Journal LTE's MO 11/28/11

Responsible gun owners
In reference to Scott Sexton's column "Guns in Tanglewood? It's possible" (Nov. 8):
On Dec. 1, pursuant to passage of House Bill 650, local governments will lose the power to prevent permit-holders from protecting themselves with concealed handguns in parks, except in narrowly defined, specifically listed "recreational facilities." As a board member of Grass Roots North Carolina, the bill's principal architect, I assure you the law is neither "confusing," as the column alleges, nor was its passage a "free-for-all."
For 16 years, concealed handgun permit-holders have proved themselves sane, sober and law-abiding. Mirroring 36 other states with concealed carry, of the 395,251 permits approved, less than one-third of a single percent (0.30 percent) have been revoked for any reason, with most revocations unrelated to guns. You can expect to see that same responsibility in parks.
You should also expect the law to deter violent predators. Echoing controlled, multi-variate studies of other states, North Carolina violent crime has dropped by 43.5 percent since the concealed handgun law's inception. Yet anecdotal evidence suggests our ostensibly "gun-free" parks have not enjoyed that benefit. Indeed, two rapes cited by Grass Roots North Carolina in debating HB 650 — occurring within five months of each other — were perpetrated in a Winston-Salem park.
Fact, not fancy, should drive public policy. Rather than scurrying to ban concealed handguns in the few areas still permissible, local leaders should embrace the law as a rational response to park violence that will likely save lives.

---

DAVID REGNERY
Mocksville

Job creation
It is an established fact that the Republican Party is opposed to an increase in taxes — including the taxes on the filthy rich. The argument for no increase in the tax rate for the wealthy is under the guise that the wealthy create jobs in America. Oh, really? Let's use a local illustration. According to the publication Business North Carolina, this past year the former CEO of Reynolds American, Susan Ivey, was paid $16.8 million in compensation.
The first question is: How many jobs did Susan Ivey and Reynolds American create in the past year? The second question is: How many jobs did Susan Ivey and Reynolds American eliminate last year? If more jobs were eliminated than created, then the Republican position is just a theory and a myth. The fact is, the rich of America are accumulating more personal wealth.
I believe the compensation for the CEO of a corporation should not exceed the salary of the president of the United States. I realize the corporate CEO must make tough decisions that affect the corporation and the employees. I also realize the president must make tough decisions that affect the nation and the world. Which of these is more important?
Consider the real reason Republicans do not want to impose a tax increase on the wealthy. Many members of Congress are millionaires — so they are the wealthy. Thus, they will not increase taxes on themselves. It all comes down to a matter of greed and selfishness.

---

JACK LUTZ
King

Sacrificial lambs
It never ceases to amaze me how bureaucracies look for and find sacrificial lambs whenever a crisis occurs.
In the Penn State child-abuse scandal, that sacrificial lamb is Coach Joe Paterno. This man, who set the bar for honesty, integrity and ethics in college athletics, has been sacrificed without justification.
If the news reports are correct, Paterno reported allegations of the sexual misconduct to his superiors as soon as he found out about them. The Pennsylvania state police commissioner, Frank Noonan, says that Paterno should have called the police to report the allegations. Paterno did what he was supposed to do. He had no personal knowledge other than a report from a third person — nothing more than hearsay — and he reported that. His superiors should have launched an investigation to get to the bottom of the allegation, which, evidently, would have included calling the police.
The trustees' board vice chairman, John Surma, said on public radio that it was "in the best interest of the university" to discharge Coach Paterno. I have always thought that it is in the best interest of any organization to be fair. Paterno was not treated fairly. He had already said that he would retire at the end of the season. To paint him with the same brush as the perpetrator is just plain wrong, and now Paterno, a shining example of what it is to be honorable, has been tarnished by the same institution that he loyally served for 60 years.

---

RONALD J. SHORT
Winston-Salem