Gun Control Facts

The 1968 Gun Control Act had many sections copied from the Nazi law of 1938. No one denies that fact. What was the purpose of the 1968 GCA? It did NOT reduce the number of violent deaths by firearms (suicides and murders), they grew from 15,000 in 1968 to 30,000 in 1993; then it slowed. Why? In 1986 the state of Florida liberalized people’s rights to keep and bear arms, then other states did the same. A university professor explained why “more guns” was followed by “less crime” in his book. In 2003 New Brunswick NJ had a “gun buy-back program”. This was followed by double the number of murders in the following year. People should read an honest book and not rely on dishonest advertising from those who attack people’s rights.

A “sense of security” is a state of mind, like happiness. Can a law guarantee happiness or a “sense of security”? Can you buy them in a store? Pessimists are unhappy and this affects their health. Those who need a law for a “sense of security” may need vitamins, medical care, or a change in attitude.

Is the right to drive (or travel) a human right or a privilege granted by the government? Did Adam and Eve need a license to drive or travel? You can drive a car or tractor without government permission as long as it is not on a public road. Did the pioneers with horse-drawn wagons in the 19th century need a license? Do you need a license to read a newspaper or watch television? What about a license to think or speak?

The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights placed restrictions on the Federal Government. The 1968 GCA should be repealed by Congress or struck down by the Supreme Court. Many rights are implicit (refer to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments). The Federal Government is restricted unless explicitly authorized, as with the Sixteenth and Eighteenth Amendments.

Ronald A. Sobieraj

A Call for Resignation

Watching the recent Council meeting on Ch. 34 over the weekend, I saw that Mr. David Caba, and others in the audience were upset as a result of the comments made by the Mayor’s Chief of Staff, Ms. Lizette Martinez. Remarks made by her to a resident that were racist and disrespectful, and that took place in front of witnesses in a public building and what’s more she still has her job. Mayor, wake up! How could you continue to have this person as part of your staff? The City will never see another Mel Ramos, now there was a Mayor’s Chief of Staff. He had respect for all the City residents, helped many of them and did his job with pride and professionalism, always putting Perth Amboy first. You never heard a racist remark coming out of his mouth. He was a true Deputy Mayor, not like what we have now. There was always someone you could talk to at City Hall; it was open to all City residents and they were knowledgeable. Mr. Ramos could talk to you about every project going on in the City because he was part of each project and saw it to completion. I don’t think Ms. Martinez has any idea of the projects going on or what they are about or even what they cost, she is too busy taking the Mayor’s picture or getting scissors for the next Grand Opening. For this she gets paid a huge salary.

The Mayor should demand that Ms. Martinez resign immediately, and find someone more capable for the job and not one that she owes a favor to. The city is paying top dollar for its people and they should demand they do a decent job at the end of the day, before they go out of town to their homes.

Sincerely,

Evelyn Perez