Letters: Rubio's 'no' vote on gun bill disappointing

  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
·3 min read
In this article:
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio speaks during a press conference in January at a stormwater treatment area in western Palm Beach County.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio speaks during a press conference in January at a stormwater treatment area in western Palm Beach County.

Rubio's 'no' vote on gun bill disappointing

A modest compromise gun bill just passed the Senate with 65 votes. Fifteen Republican senators joined all Democrats for the bill. Sen. Marco Rubio was among the 33 Republican “nay” votes against the bill. The bill has funds for mental health and a few modest steps such as increased background checks for gun buyers under 21 — but at least it does something. I expected another “nay” from our Sen. Rick Scott, but Sen. Rubio’s failure to step up for passage of something was a sad surprise.

Gary R. Alexander, West Palm Beach

Where's animal control in sheriff's budget?

I just read in the Post that the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s budget increase will amount to a total $816 million. In another article in the same edition, I see a sheriff’s office spokesperson defending the unnecessary killing of the black bear by saying they have no officer trained to deal with wildlife incidents, and therefore no tranquilizer gun. I guess $816 million can’t be stretched to train one individual to be knowledgeable enough to handle animals without shooting them. It’s a shame, especially since one month’s rent for Sheriff Ric Bradshaw’s luxury offices would probably be enough for said training.

Gigi Beach, West Palm Beach

FOR SUBSCRIBERS: PBSO didn't need to fire at black bear shot, killed in Royal Palm Beach, FWC report says

High Court needs honest nominees

Liars should never be leaders, and Supreme Court Justices should be fired for lying under oath.

Kathy Wallace, Delray Beach

Supreme Court showing partisan flackery

The Supreme Court held in Dobbs that it is time to "return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives." The elected representatives of citizens of southern states decided to leave the union rather than relinquish slavery; to enact Jim Crow laws, and commit unconscionable acts of violence against Blacks rather than allow them to vote, attend integrated schools or use public accommodations without regard to race. For most of the history of this nation, elected representatives treated women as non-citizens, denying them the right to vote, own property, establish credit, or become economically independent by controlling decisions about child-bearing. It took a civil war, Supreme Court rulings and federal law enforcement actions to correct the injustices legislated by those representatives.

More: PHOTOS: Reaction against Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v Wade.

The day before Dobbs was issued, the Supreme Court overturned a law, enacted by representatives of the state of New York, requiring people to demonstrate a particular need for carrying a gun in order to get a license to carry a gun in a concealed way in public. In Dobbs, two justices, who testified at their confirmation hearings that Roe was settled law, voted to overturn Roe. They did so while giving assurances that other freedoms — to contraception, same-sex intercourse and same-sex marriage — granted on the same basis as Roe's abortion rights, would not be affected by Dobbs.

SCOTUS' blindness to the history of relying on elected representatives' wisdom, its hypocrisy in advocating remedies only when it's likely to produce laws supporting its partisan views; and the presumption that reasonable people would trust its assertions on future actions in the face of its members' prevarication about Roe, are stunning.

Deborah Jason, Palm Beach Gardens

This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Florida Sen. Marco Rubio vote against modest gun safety bill a letdown