OPINION
The Chronicle
Ernest H. Pitt
Publisher Emeritus
1974-2015
617 N. Liberty Street
336-722-8624 I 41 \
WWW.WSCHRONICLE.COM /
Elaine Pitt Business Manager
Donna Rogers Managing Editor
wali D. Pitt Digital Manager
Our Mission
The Chronicle is dedicated to serving the
residents of Winston-Salem and Forsyth County
by giving voice to the voiceless, speaking truth
to power, standing for integrity and
encouraging open communication and
lively debate throughout the community.
GUEST EDITORIAL
Where is the
sane, sensible,
calm debate
about guns?
Emotions and politics seem to be why we cannot,
as a nation, have sane, sensible, rational, calm debate
about guns. . ,
Instead, we somehow lump mass killings, gang
violence, domestic violence, target shooting, Self
defense, home-defense, fear of a tyrannical govern
ment, the Second Amendment, interpretations of the
Second Amendment, the sanctity of the Second
Amendment as it was written, et al into one giant
stew pot, season it with unfettered emotional hot
sauce and smother it in a political cream sauce that
masks the issues.
Second Amendment purists cling to the fact the
words say nothing about any types of restrictions on
the right to bear arms. While they do not- at least not
out loud _ argue about the age restrictions placed on
handgun owners, they refuse to consider any other
types of restrictions that might well put a dent in the
number of people killed in mass shootings in
America. And they point to the fact - and, indeed, it
is fact _ that people who want to kill large numbers
of other people have many other means to do so
aside from the high-capacity rounds weapons.
They reason that if we restrict the types of guns
Americans can have because those guns are some
times (often, is more accurate) used to slaughter
dozens of human beings, and allow them only to be
in the hands of those serving in the military, then we
must also restrict commercial jet liners to military
use. After all, it was large commercial jets that were
commandeered by terrorists and flown into the Twin
Towers and the Pentagon, resulting in thousands of
deaths.
Yes, yes. Jets can be used to carry out terrorist
acts and mass killings. But since 9/11, our country
has implemented many safeguards and restrictions
that significantly lessen the chances of another such
incident.
One can also argue that automobiles and 18
wheelers can be used as weapons in mass killings.
Indeed, especially if outfitted with car bombs or the
right mix of ingredients within a trailer. Really, the
list of everyday objects that can be used in carrying
out killings is long. But does that - should that - pre
clude frank discussion about America's guns?
A reader pointed out recently that discussion
seems to center on military-style weapons" and
there are misunderstandings about what constitutes
such a weapon. Fair enough. He also points out that
after-market devices are available that can, for
example, convert an 8- or 9-shot capacity semiauto
matic magazine into a twin-drum 100-round maga
zine. Perhaps a killer would buy a $500 handgun and
outfit it with a $400 device that increases its capacity
to kill. Perhaps rational discussion about America's
gun laws and regulations should include whether
such after-market devices should even be legal.
Ah, but there we go again, you say. Fueling the
fire of those who want to burn the Second
Amendment into thin air. And there we are, once
again, standing on either side of a polarizing line.
Yes, we believe it is possible to protect
Americans' Second Amendment rights while pro
tecting many hundreds of Americans' lives who will
yet become victims in mass shootings because we
cannot or will not come to the table and discuss an
issue, much less attempt to reach a logical compro
mise.
And why is that? Emotions. And politics. Far bet
ter, isn't it, that a Capitol Hill politician protect his
chances of re-election than the lives of his fellow
countrymen.
^The Index-Journal of Greenwood, S.C. ^
ElVWtt
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
?
Democrats
applaud
UJS. Supreme
Court
abortion decision
To the Editor:
The United States Supreme Court
has reached a decision to repeal
Texas's proposed bill that woul
drequire women's health clinics to
adhere to stricter regulations, on the
grounds that it would severely restrict
women's access to health care.
Congresswoman Alma Adams has
called this ruling a "victory for
women nationwide." The bill in ques
tion would have made it necessary for
doctors to have admittingprivileges at
a hospital within 30 miles of the clin
ic and for the clinics themselves to
have elaborate, expensive, hospital
grade equipment. These requirements
would have shut down an estimated
75 percent of Texas's women's health
clinics, which are already held to very
high safety
standards. As a result, almost 1
million women in Texas would not
live within 250 miles of anabortion
clinic. The court majority argued that
the bill would serve only to prevent
women from accessing safe care, and
Justice Ginsburg went as far as to say
that it was "beyond rational beliefthat
[the bill] could genuinely protect the
health of women ."The case was
determined by a 5-3 majority, with
Justice Kennedy, the only swing.vote
onabortion issues, joining liberal jus
tices in the decision to repeal the bill.
This shows that evenwith
Republicans' refusal to appoint
President Obama's selected replace
ment for the late JusticeScalia,
Democrats can still win a majority on
women's health issues. This case is
also a significant one for women's
health because it shows that the
restriction of a woman's access toan
abortion without probable cause is
unconstitutional. Strict abortion regu
lations across thecountry and even in
North Carolina may come under
scrutiny in light of this ruling. The
state'slaw that requires a woman to
submit ultrasounds to the health
department before an abortion canbe
performed is a step toward Texas-like
abortion regulation, and if North
Carolina legislators try to pass any
thing more extreme, they may be con
stitutionally unable to do so.The
Forsyth County Democratic Party
supports the right of all women to
choose, and this
includes supporting the clinics
that provide abortions and give
women access to carry out their
choice. The FCDP maintains that the
limitation of a woman's right of
access to health servicesand programs
is unconstitutional and detrimental to
women's health. The party hopes that
the Supreme fcourt will continue to
uphold women's health for the sake
of women and girls across the country
and in North Carolina.
Forsyth County Democratic
Party
Winston-Salem
Civil Rights Act
turns 52 amid
regression
To the Editor:
Democratic National Committee
(DNC) Chair Rep. Debbie
Wasserman Schultz joined DNC Vice
Chair for Voter Protection and
Expansion Donna Brazile and DNC
Black Caucus Chair Virgie Rollins to
issue the following joint statement:
? "As Americans across the country
prepared to celebrate our independ
ence this past holiday weekend, we
also celebrated the 52nd anniversary
of the Civil Rights Act - landmark
legislation that carried our nation one
step closer to fully realizing the pro
found promise in our Declaration of
Independence that we are all created
equal. The law expanded voting
rights, made discrimination based on
i 1
race, color, religion, sex, or national
origin illegal, and protected the rights
of all Americans to use public facili
ties, and to access public education.
The passage of the Civil Rights
Act, which was called for by
President John F. Kennedy and
signed into law by President Lyndon
Johnson, truly belongs to the great
multitude of courageous civil rights
leaders, activists, protesters, and war
riors for justice who fought tirelessly
through decades of oppression,
racism, segregation, discrimination
and mistreatment. These American
men and women endured unthinkable
adversity, sometimes even sacrificing
their lives in the struggle, to fbrge a
mote perfect union.
"Although they carried our nation
a long way, we can best honor then
legacy by recognizing that we still
have much farther to go. In too many
states, conservative politicians are
working to roll back the right to vote
with restrictive voter ID laws, cut
backs in early voting and same-day
registration, and reductions in poll
locations, especially in minority dis
tricts. Democrats are committed to
standing strong against those who
seek to win elected office by stripping
certain groups of Americans their
most basic right - the right to vote.
"The assault on voting rights is a
reminder that the deep scars of our
past have yet to fully heal, and the
promise of true equality has yet to be
fully attained. So we must remain
vigilant in defending their progress,,
and rededicate ourselves to the cause
of moving forward every day. In too
many communities, hardworking
families are still struggling to get
ahead. And in far too many cases,
names like Sandra Bland, Freddie
Gray, Tray von Martin, and others
who hauntingly remind us that the
struggle for economic and racial jus
tice continues, and that we have a
duty to continue to tell their stories.
"Democrats believe our people
are our greatest strength, and we will
continue to fight to expand opportuni
ty for all Americans, regardless of
their race, and to build an economy
that works for everyone, not just
those at the top. We must elect a
Democrat as our next president to
keep our nation's march of progress
moving forward."
Democratic National Committee
Washington, D.C.
4
HB 2 revisions
fail to provide
meaningful
changes to law
To the Editor:
Governor McCrory and legisla
tive Republicans just showed their
true priorities, putting their divisive
partisan social agenda ahead of
North Carolina's economy.
The governor failed to ever push
for meaningful changes to his dis
criminatory law, instead sacrificing
thousands of jobs and hundreds of
millions of dollars.
It's clear that middle class fami
lies need new leadership to put jobs
and the economy first.
Kimberly Reynolds
N.C.Democratic Party
Executive Director
Raleigh