Opinions should be informed, educated

Your Jan. 24 article re: Keith Olbermann’s departure proves one thing. You are ignorant of truth and like a young baby soaking up your liberal professor’s rantings about conservatives and the Tea Party.

Although not a Tea Party member, I, at least, am informed about them before I speak about them. No doubt, this is something you should strive to learn as you complete the remainder of your college education.

You have no basis, whatsoever, to make a comment that “”we’ll soon see that the Tea Party people are ineffective as hell too.”” What is your basis for that comment? Did you research if their influence has diminished? If you had, you would have come to another conclusion. Were you sleeping during the recent elections? Oh, I am sorry, you are just a little man yet and haven’t learned to speak your own mind or the truth. You only know how to babble and parrot what your professors tell you. I can just picture you in class, eyes wide, large smile on your face as the ex-hippie professor drones on about his/her liberal views instead of giving you a balanced education. Well best wishes on that note, here is to hoping you mature over the next three years and are able to make a statement based on research and your own findings.

Please give me the courtesy of providing one sample of Fox News not reporting the facts. I would like one sample from you. Write me the statement made and by whom and tell me why you believe it is false. I am trying to keep in mind that you are just a little boy who appears to think that his professors are oh so smart.

Pity this country with students like you threatening to be potential graduates.

— Dave and Janice Fisher

Responsibility supports limited gun rights

In response to the editorial by Trevor Laky:

I understand how you can look at an individual like Mr. Zamudio and see that as proof that in the right hands the freedom to carry a firearm is a good thing, but I think by focusing on him you are both setting up unrealistic expectations for the average gun-carrier and ignoring the other side of the issues behind gun control: keeping guns out of the hands of people who do not deserve them and can not be expected to use them in an appropriate way.

Zamudio’s behavior demonstrated extraordinary courage, running toward the sound of gun shoots, and presence of mind and control to observe the situation before acting. But that’s just it; his behavior was extraordinary. Just because he was able to act with collectedness and reserve does not mean that any random individual who just happens to possess a gun would do the same. A different person in that same situation could very easily have made things worse by acting rashly and that is a scenario worth being mindful of. 

I do not think it is reasonable to think that in a dangerous and uncertain situation the average person, armed or not, will be able to act the way Zamudio did. Holding up rather exceptional individuals like him as a possible standard is unrealistic and it draws attention away from the reality that there are people in our society who should not have firearms, such as the mentally unstable and those with violent criminal pasts.

I do not believe for a second that the Founders gave us the Second Amendment so every Tom, Dick and Harry could carry a gun with no restrictions. But rather those individuals who have proved themselves responsible and trustworthy should have that right. If something can be learned for the tragedy on Jan. 8 and the actions of those involved, it should be that the Second Amendment is a right that not everyone should, or is even capable of, exercising with maturity and foresight and is a fact that that needs to be considered.

— Ariel B. Flowers

Journalism sophomore