Point coin drops helpful
Regarding the recent letter, “Somers Point allows too many coin drops”:
I take personal offense at the reported comment of someone in Philadelphia that the city is “the town of beggars.” Maybe that person and the writer should step back and look who is doing the so-called begging — boy and girl scouts, local volunteer fire departments, Little League ball teams and last but not least veterans of the VFW, Vietnam Veterans of America and other nonprofit organizations.
Most of these people are here to help or assist the people of Somers Point. Who pays for some of the firefighting equipment and supplies. Who provides activities to keep the children occupied and out of trouble, teaching them team efforts and sportsmanship in daily living.
The veterans who man the coin drops at the intersections and grocery stores are the same men and women who put their lives on the line for others, including the letter writer and the person in Philadelphia. The money collected is used to assist the families of veterans in need and partial scholarships for needy children. None of the money collected (from those who wish to assist) is for personal gain.
Calling it begging is not appreciated or justified.
Egg Harbor Township
Maybe states won’t follow federal gun-control law
All states in the union enact their own gun license and ownership laws. California leads all states with the strictest gun laws (New Jersey ranks second) while Alaska has the most liberal gun laws. Alaska has no gun restrictions regarding a waiting period to purchase, how many guns a person may own or weapon-carry restrictions. This stands to reason since wild moose and bears share the landscape with the people of that state.
This approach to states controlling their own gun laws has stood for centuries and is intended to meet the needs of their constituents. Now the Democrats, particularly the presidential candidates, are demanding that President Trump address gun violence by insisting Congress create a federal gun law covering all manner of gun ownership issues (such as mental health, waiting periods, capacity, number of guns owned and such), insisting the president is pro-NRA and soft on gun violence.
This leads me to ask, why is the federal government taking on the roll of enacting gun law? Many states (almost all ruled by Democratic governors) already decided on their own not to abide by some existing federal laws (such as marijuana and immigration laws), so why does any state need another federal law that states may not to follow? Courts have already ruled that the federal government cannot hold back funds from those states that refuse to abide by federal law. In short, the federal government seems to have no recourse and no power to punish states that refuse to abide by federal law.
I anticipate that any federal law limiting gun ownership in many forms would not be followed by all states. The only reason I can come up with that the Democrats are making this an issue is that they need talking points to try and win the next election.
Frank X. Cavallaro