More people on the planet is not the solution we should be seeking
Re: “Why dads, not ‘duds,’ are important for the baby bust,” Sept. 3 commentary
The commentary about the worldwide declining birth rate misses a fundamental point: Population cannot continue to expand indefinitely.
Global resources are finite, and population levels eventually must follow. Already, first-world nations were experiencing a pause, and now decline, in the number of births. Japan, for one, has been coping with an aging population, the unmistakable sign, for decades.
The conversation should be about doing more with less and not pushing past an unsustainable consumption of Earth’s gifts. We need to worry less about fertility and more about ‘making do’ with fewer people. Our ingenuity will do the rest.
Harry Puncec, Lakewood
Mass shootings call for restrictions on social media
Re: “The latest shooting tragedy is easy to comprehend,” Aug. 29 letter to the editor
Writing about the church shooting in Minneapolis, a reader writes: “In a country where a majority of the Supreme Court and many citizens believe that a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to own flintlocks fully applies to today’s much more deadly weapons, such tragedies are totally comprehensible.”
I agree, but would add that the First Amendment’s freedom of speech was added at a time when media was print only. Could the Founders have visualized the power of the internet and social media to influence, in this case, a mass shooter?
The FCC was established in 1934 to regulate the then-new radio medium, and has continued with television and internet. We have precedent here for potential restriction on media. The recent commentary on Mississippi’s attempt to impose age restrictions on Bluesky shows how controversial this can be, but I believe it is possible.
Malfeasants misuse social media, posing a serious threat to our people — from those who perpetrate mass violence against innocent people to stalkers and groomers of innocent children — taking advantage of freedoms that were meant to protect, not harm.
For our public safety, we must find and set reasonable boundaries for our national freedoms. We already have the framework to do so.
Frances Rossi, Boulder
Mass shootings call for armed law-abiding citizens
Unfortunately, many mass killings have happened at schools, grocery stores, churches, military bases, city streets and theaters. We should always pray for understanding and comfort for those loved ones left behind.
There have been criminals on earth for thousands of years. Since they are criminals and have deranged minds, they will work very hard on obtaining weapons, such as guns, explosives, and moving vehicles, to kill people.
A great help for this unfortunate problem is for state and federal law officials to encourage law-abiding citizens to carry guns in person, whether they be out in the open or concealed. This would greatly help the criminals to go somewhere else where citizens cannot protect themselves.
This would greatly help more people to be alive and less injured if the criminal was shot by a law-abiding citizen immediately when they hear and see mass murders taking place. Keep in mind that law enforcement cannot be everywhere at all times.
The Second Amendment of the US Constitution says: “… the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
I believe that there are close to 10,000 laws written for people to not be able to use or carry firearms. Do you really think that the criminal will know about these laws and obey them?
We need to get our heads out of the sand and encourage law-abiding citizens to carry firearms open or concealed at all times.
Jim Welker, Loveland
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.