Guns and Women

* In response to “A Call to Arms: Controlling Access to Guns Must Become a Women’s Issue,” by Police Commissioner Ann Reiss Lane, Opinion, June 20: The civil right of self-defense, guaranteed by the Second Amendment, is the concern of many, many women--the fastest growing segment of new gun owners--who have seen intimidation and tragedy happen to them, loved ones or friends and have made the decision, “Never again.” There are lots of us, and in my capacity as one National Rifle Assn. member/instructor I am providing even more who will oppose your policy of restriction of this civil right. As a competitive shooter I say this: When I have my Olympic medal, it will be with no thanks to you. ALEXANDRA L. CARTER Los Angeles

* It seems that every discussion for/against gun control terminates with the same conclusion: Get real! There are too many guns out there to have a recall or registration, plus the NRA has such a strong lobby. Lane’s column casts the burden of gun control on women, which should be approached as a public safety and health issue; I strongly support this view. We may be fighting “windmills” from the constitutional aspect of the right to bear arms, but where is it written that we have the right to ammunition? JOAUN CANTILLON Los Angeles

* Although I was in disagreement with much of Lane’s column, we are in total agreement on one point. If law-abiding citizens have no access to guns for the purpose of self-protection, it will indeed be very easy for officers arriving at a crime scene to determine which individual is the “dangerous felon” and which one is the “law-abiding citizen.” Simply check to see which one is still breathing! PATTI CLIFFORD Riverside

* Police Commissioner Lane isn’t likely to win advocates for her kind of gun control by implying that a woman who opts to become a responsible gun owner and later shoots an attacker will experience greater stress from that than from the stress of not shooting the attacker and being robbed, beaten, raped and murdered by him. Women who can keep small children safe in a house full of electrical and chemical perils, drive in freeway traffic, be bank officers, computer operators, factory machine operators, surgeons and even fighter pilots may reject the role of victims and, as voters, reject the one-side-only policy of the commissioner. CHARLES F. WETHERBEE Pasadena

* Re “At 2 Ends of City, Death by Stray Fire,” June 15: That Rosa Barrios and Sara Roberson had to die is a pitiful shame. The NRA can go hang! I say let’s round up every gun in this violent place, melt them down, and make something useful for humankind from them. ELIZABETH RODRIGUEZ Torrance

Old Fossils * If you think “Jurassic Park” was scary, you should see the Washington version, “Geriatric Park,” where the old fossils won’t eat you, they just tax you to death. BYRON SLATER San Diego

Metro Rail Police * I read your article “Block Seeks to Take Over Transit Police Operations” (June 18). I ride the RTD to the Metro Rail station at Vernon and Long Beach every day and have done this for the past 18 months. I ride the Metro Rail to downtown Long Beach. The Metro Rail is the safest and most comfortable ride thanks to the Sheriff’s Department. I am sure that without their presence there would be a number of problems. I have yet to see any tagging on the Metro Rail as seen on the RTD. I think the presence of the deputies at any given time is a deterrent for this type of crime. You don’t know when they are going to board the train, or when you will be asked to show your ticket/pass, etc. They are doing a great job; I hope Sheriff Sherman Block wins the proposal. JIMMIE C. RIDER Los Angeles

Balkans War * The scapegoating continues. First, there were the Serbs who, in their effort to cleanse, started the Balkans war. Then there were the neighboring Europeans who stood by paralyzed in inaction. Now the blame is placed on Germany for recognizing a couple of former Yugoslav republics too quickly. Meanwhile the U.S. has been posturing, sable-rattling and otherwise blowing hot air. The real question is, who can you help in that fractured, bloody landscape? In a region where every section and sect--Croats, Muslims, Catholics, Serbs, etc.--fights the other, any involvement would be utter folly. PETER WEISBROD Laguna Beach

Ross Perot * I would like to retitle Morton Kondracke’s June 20 column (“Swimming With a Shark Named Perot”) “Flying With an Eagle Named Perot.” The shark roles appear to be played by the lobbyists who are selfishly acting against the good of the people. Thanks to Ross Perot’s example and inspiration I’ve become an active citizen rather than a passive observer. Is Kondracke afraid Perot is a threatening menace because he is awakening the public to become aware participants in this country? JONELLE REYNOLDS Carlsbad

* Finally, someone who is willing to come out in print and say it as it really is pertaining to Perot. Perot has been enjoying a free ride with the media for a year now, with Democrats and Republicans pandering to him. Perot is a man who knows how to attract and draw the weak, dissatisfied, elderly, failures, etc., to him. And now with Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garden Grove) embracing him, that’s all we need! If he were really interested in improving the economy and joblessness in this country, why hasn’t he offered to help rather than constantly beating up on whoever is the President? Perot is clearly a small-minded man who sees himself as the only person in this country with a solution. Except whenever he’s been confronted and questioned, he either shies away from the answer or crawls back into the woodwork until the air clears and he starts his negative infomercials again. LILA MADDEN Downey

* At last I’ve figured it out--Perot is the Jim Bakker of the American political scene! And wouldn’t Will Rogers have loved him? ELEANOR JACKSON Palm Springs

‘Politics of Meaning’ * Michael Lerner’s explanation (Column Left, June 20) of what he means by “the politics of meaning” is valuable, and Hillary Clinton has not deserved the derision she has faced for adopting his phrase. It’s a woolly phrase, nevertheless, and does not convey what he says he has in mind: the need to switch from cynicism to idealism, “from an ethos of selfishness to an ethos of caring.” “The meaning of meaning” is an important philosophical question. “The politics of meaning” begs that question. It’s one of those amorphous formulations that sound profound but are essentially double-talk. What Lerner is really asking, I guess, is the meaning of politics. PAUL JARRICO Santa Monica

* Do I have this straight? Lerner (media-dubbed “guru of the White House”) thinks that the “politics of meaning” will fix a “deprivation of meaning” we’ve inherited from the ‘80s? He mourns the loss of “caring, ethical and spiritual sensitivity”? He’s concerned about meaning in America? Well, someone should tell him and his meaning-mates that it is their liberal friends who have taken the prayer out of schools, the value out of life in the womb, and would love to make government the god we are beholden to. No thanks, Mr. Lerner, I’ll stick to the meaning-leanings of Reagan/Bush anytime; I happen to be familiar with their guru. BOBBIE DEARING FREGA Los Angeles

* Lerner is right on target if he and the Clintons seek to shift “ . . . the dominant discourse from selfishness to caring and idealism. . . .” He is also eminently practical. Think about it. Haven’t you gained the most when you cared? Haven’t you lost the most when you’ve been selfish? I know I have. RICHARD F. DOWLING Laguna Niguel

* When I read Lerner’s explanation (“Hillary and Me,” or was it “Me and Hillary”?), I tried hard to concentrate on the meaning of meaning. But all that came to mind was Rasputin and the czarina. FRANK GATELL Santa Monica

Economic Growth * Charles R. Morris (Opinion, June 20) does well to remind us that a prolonged real annual growth rate of 2.5% is not utterly shabby and that growth of 3% is pretty good. Over the past century, we seem to have had average growth of a little over 3%. Discretionary government “fine-tuning” and “stimulus” surely will hurt more than help growth. But Morris misleads in suggesting that substantial growth likely requires appreciable inflation. This is not implied by economic theory, and is not demonstrated by economic experience. During the 20 years prior to World War I, the Roaring Twenties, the period of the 1950s, Camelot in the 1960s and the voodoo years of the 1980s, gratifying economic growth was accompanied by very modest or even negative inflation. In contrast, we had slow growth and high inflation in the 1970s. Inflation is neither necessary nor sufficient for a vigorous economy. Inflation is a price we need not pay to prosper. WILLIAM R. ALLEN Professor, Department of Economics, UCLA