No need for any more laws restricting guns

*No need for any more laws restricting guns *Motive in Charleston shooting is very clear *Mayor miss

No need for any more laws restricting guns

We don’t need any more laws. Gun safety is taught by reputable gun organizations and gun clubs, often at no cost.

Laws mandating this or that are an infringement on our rights and are intolerable and illegal according to my Bill of Rights, and just another backdoor measure toward confiscation. When are the liberals who claim outrage at gun violence and crime going to address the real problems?

The hypocrites cry out that capital punishment is wrong, but daily allow the murder of babies through abortion and hide the crime under the bogus terminology of reproductive rights. What is needed is to stop punishing good citizens, and the vast majority of gun owners are just that.

Why not go after the criminals who ignore every law that the liberals pass and punish them for a change? What a novel idea.

Terry K. Hurlburt


Motive in Charleston shooting is very clear

This is a public service announcement to all viewers of Fox News to explain the motivation behind the recent mass shooting at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, S.C.

It was not based on “hostility towards Christians,” as Steve Doocy said. And “… maybe he hates Christian churches,” as Brian Kilmeade suggested, was also not a motive. Those exact same words, “maybe he hates Christian churches,” were repeated by Rudy Giuliani later on Fox and they were still not true.

On the day after the shooting, Mr. Doocy found it “extraordinary” that the shooting was labeled a hate crime. This as Rick Santorum called the shooting “an assault on religious liberty,” which it was not.

There are many more examples, but I’m certain that as Fox News viewers you are familiar with them.

The crime was based on racism. The shooter had apartheid flags sewn on his clothing and a Confederate pride flag license plate on his car. His friends knew him as a racist. As he was shooting his victims, he said, “I am here to shoot black people” to a woman that he spared so that we would know his purpose. Of his motivation, there can be no doubt.

So, diversity was not “a contributing factor,” as Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum stated. A board member of the National Rifle Association suggested that because the pastor voted against concealed-carry legislation, “Innocent people died because of his position on a political issue.” The pastor, who was also a state legislator and was killed in the shootings, was not to blame.

I hope this helps. Thank you for your time.

Paul Donahue


Mayor missed points on casino package

In Schenectady Mayor Gary McCarthy’s recent column, he replies to critics who have asked why he never tried to negotiate a host community agreement (HCA) or similar benefits package with Rush Street Gaming.

It is gaming industry practice for a community to use its leverage to bargain for impact mitigation funds, goodwill payments, revenue guarantees, or other concessions from applicants seeking approval for their casino proposals. Indeed, it has been Rush Street’s practice to offer such benefits when wooing a host community. To see how generous Rush has been, go to .

Nonetheless, Mayor McCarthy chose to be chief cheerleader and muscle for Rush Street, rather than chief negotiator for the people of Schenectady. Unable to explain why he left millions of host community benefits on the table, Mayor McCarthy gives a two-part defense: (1) He dismisses HCA advocates as “anti-casino crusaders” with an “ironic” new cause; and (2) He declares “the Schenectady deal,” where we receive only the dollars required by law, to be better than the HCA between the town of Tyre and Lago Casino. He also scoffs at the extra $10 million in benefits the town will be receiving under its HCA.

When the mayor insisted such agreements are not feasible in New York, we pointed to the Tyre example, but no one expected Schenectady to slavishly follow the terms of the Lago agreements.

HCAs depend very much on local conditions, and both Tyre and Seneca County believe they have achieved highly favorable accords with Lago and its $425 million investment — well worth the tax abatements, and with locked-in real estate taxes (as compared to Rush Street’s likely assessment challenges and exemption requests). To see why, go to .

It is not at all ironic that those who opposed the casino due to its expected negative effects challenge the mayor for leaving millions on the table that could have been used to mitigate those impacts.

Residents supporting the casino for the promised new revenues and jobs should also wonder why the mayor has not sought to obtain millions of dollars prior to the facility opening (as has been done in Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Des Plaines), as well as firm commitments to give local residents priority in jobs and as vendors.

For maximum casino benefits, and minimum harm, Schenectady needs a leader, not a cheerleader.

David Giacalone


The writer is editor of

Fix issues at State St. and Washington Ave.

I am writing to you because I do not know whether the city of Schenectady, county of Schenectady or state of New York is responsible, and you are capable of getting the attention of all three.

My subject is the intersection of State Street and Washington Avenue. Coming east from the Western Gateway Bridge toward State Street, the overhead signs and the paint on the road indicate straight only. In spite of this, at almost every turn of the light there is someone who wants to make a left turn across traffic to Washington Avenue toward Union Street.

This is dangerous in several respects. It is dangerous for the traffic behind the person turning because that person makes a sudden and unexpected stop.

It is dangerous for the oncoming traffic for obvious reasons, and it is dangerous for pedestrians who normally think it is safe to cross Washington Avenue.

Could the responsible party please step up to the plate and either create a left-hand turn lane, which is protected with a turn arrow, or else enforce the straight-only signs. Somebody is going to be hurt here if this problem is not fixed.

While we are looking at this intersection, could we please consider shortening the walk light? I spend a lot of time at that light, and I have seen all kinds of people crossing. Unless someone starts very late, there is always a full 20 seconds after all people have crossed before the light turns green.

I am all for safe pedestrians, but this light is unnecessarily causing a big holdup of traffic and the related loss of productivity.

Tom Gifford



The Gazette welcomes letters to the editor from readers.

There is no specific word limit, but shorter letters will get preference for publication and timeliness.

Letters of about 200-300 words are suggested. Longer letters will be published online only.

Please include your name, community, phone number and an email address for verification. Writers are limited to one letter every 30 days.

For information on where to send letters, see the bottom of this page.

Categories: Letters to the Editor

Leave a Reply