Flag Day seems to hold extra significance this year: Letters

Flag Day seems to hold extra significance this year

June 10 — To the Editor:

Flag Day, celebrated on June 14, has taken on a new meaning in our current times.

Americans have been pledging allegiance to the flag since Christian Socialist Baptist Minister Francis Bellamy wrote the first pledge in 1892. The pledge has changed a few times since then. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance].

The flag has changed a few times since then as well. Stars were added as each new state was added. The blue canton and the thirteen stripes are the same as the 1777 flag with thirteen stars. Also realize that Americans didn’t always put their hands over their hearts during the pledge until Dec. 22, 1942.

The original Bellamy Salute looked too similar to the salutes being used by German and Italian fascists at the time. The United States, along with other nations, was fighting against fascism back then, not embracing it. What is a bit troubling lately is that some Americans appear to be pledging their allegiance to flags other than the current flag of the United States. Two versions of the pledge attempted to clarify that we should be pledging to the flag of the United States of America. Note that our current national flag has no diagonal lines, letters/names, animals/snakes or yellow on it. Our current flag was not created in South Carolina, where the first shots of the Civil War rang out. It sort of defies logic that some Americans think that they are being patriots when they are not pledging allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. The current version, signed into law on June 14th 1954 by President Eisenhower, reads as follows: "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Don Cavallaro

Rye

If you want to improve gun safety laws, vote out Gov. Sununu

June 10 — To the Editor:

In August 2019, Gov. Chris Sununu vetoed three bills which would have expanded background checks, required a three-day waiting period before the purchase and delivery of a firearm, and prohibited carrying a firearm on school property. In his veto message, Sununu wrote that “New Hampshire is one of the safest states in the nation, and we have a long and proud tradition of responsible firearm ownership. Our laws are well-crafted and fit our culture of responsible gun ownership and individual freedom.”

One year later, the governor vetoed a “red flag” bill that would have established a civil procedure to remove firearms and ammunition from someone found at risk of harming him or herself or others. The proposed bill was like legislation in place in 19 other states. In his veto message, Mr. Sununu stated that the law “would weaken the constitutional rights of law-abiding New Hampshire citizens.”

Following the most recent school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, which resulted in the death of 19 students and two teachers, Sununu observed “there is no state that is immune from a crisis like we saw in Texas.” When asked by reporters about tighter firearm laws, Sununu stated, “We’re not looking to make any changes.”

Over three years, the governor’s inaction to limit access to firearms from those who pose a danger has morphed from “New Hampshire is one of the safest states in the nation” to “there is no state that is immune from a crisis like we saw in Texas.” Mr. Sununu seems to believe that any firearm restriction aimed at mitigating gun violence by an unstable minority is a threat to the law-abiding citizen majority. In November, New Hampshire voters must decide whether to support those who favor making no changes, like Gov. Sununu, or to vote for candidates who will work toward lawful solutions that protect both individual liberty and public safety.

Michael Shea

Portsmouth

Republicans make absurd argument for continued sales of assault weapons

June 8 — To the Editor:

If you really want to understand just how out of touch, insensitive and desperate Republicans have become regarding gun safety legislation discussions, just listen to some of their comments defending the continued sales of guns like the AR-15 to the general public.

First, Rep, Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) defended not banning the AR-15 based on the events of 9/11 stating, "And airplanes were used that day, as a weapon to kill thousands of people and to inflict terror on our country. There wasn't a discussion about banning airplanes." Or there was this from Sen. John Thune (R-South Dakota), and Ken Buck (R-Colorado); the continued sale of the AR-15 is essential because, "vermin like prairie dogs and raccoon are the main targets for people owning AR-!5 style semi-automatic rifle." Buck went on to say that, AR-15s were needed to stop raccoons "before they get to our chickens."

In light of the ongoing slaughter of children and teachers, like those from Newtown, Connecticut or Uvalde, Texas, and the random slaughter of people visiting grocery stores, churches, synagogues, movie theaters, night clubs, colleges etc., it is impossible for me to determine which of the above comments from Republican lawmakers defending the continued sale of AR-15 style weapons is the most disgusting, insensitive, ridiculous and outright pathetic.

How do you even try to compare killing prairie dogs and raccoons with an AR-15 in the same discussion involving the slaughter of babies in school? How distorted can one man's mind be to even think of such lunacy? Imagine a parent of a child killed in one of those school massacres hearing or reading such comments? Have these people no compassion, no human feelings and no sense of decency?

If the arguments defending the continued sale of the AR-15 and weapons like them as presented by Scalise, Buck and Thune are the grounds for its continued sale to the public, then there is no doubt that they should be banned again, as they were in 1994. Their arguments are not even worthy of consideration. The 2nd Amendment was not put in place to protect people and chickens from prairie dogs and raccoons. And, in case Rep. Scalise missed some little details about planes, you need specific training and a license to fly a plane that is registered and inspected. We also did not ban fertilizer after the Oklahoma City bombing.

The ongoing debate regarding gun safety legislation in Congress has become a tragic comedy. Republicans completely refuse to consider any meaningful legislation that could actually have some impact on reducing the violence. In the end, some pathetic do nothing legislation will pass so as to give members of Congress another temporary time out with the voters, while the carnage continues. And then, after the next slaughters, we will keep repeating the same exercise in futility ad nauseum. All this while the world watches and shake their heads in disbelief.

Rich DiPentima, LTC, USAF, Ret.

Portsmouth

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Flag Day seems to hold extra significance this year: Letters