In response to the recent Forum letter announcing a “Sandy Hook vigil,” I ask: For what? The gun Adam Lanza used to kill 20 schoolchildren and six adults was bought legally (my emphasis) by his mother. Lanza killed his mother and went to do his deed. What new or “enhanced” current law would have prevented the massacre?
The editorial from The Philadelphia Inquirer (“Gun Control Wins Big: But Can the Momentum Be Maintained?” Dec. 3) is liberal claptrap. Gun control “fantasy,” as opposed to “reality,” and “The-NRA-is-the-problem” won big.
Unfortunately, nowhere in the editorial is there any connection between what “won big” and how that would have prevented any of the incidents mentioned.
Did the “winning” candidates say specifically how their proposals would have prevented any of the incidents? Or did they just appeal to voters’ emotions? What solution is offered by making the NRA the bogeyman?
Look at gun violence in Chicago or any other major city. Almost-draconian gun control laws are on the books. How have they worked? How many killings have they stopped? I submit few, if any, because people can find guns “on the street” no matter what the law requires. Does anyone really believe that those people will worry about more gun laws? I doubt it, because they don’t worry about the current laws.
More gun control laws, “enhanced” gun control laws and similar efforts will fail and will be no more effective than current gun control laws. What’s the next step? Do we try prohibiting or confiscating some or all personal firearms?
Before you answer “yes,” remember that we tried that approach with alcohol. What were the results during the years before Prohibition was repealed? Crime, the “speak-easy” and other sordid events. We ought not go down that road again.
“Common-sense gun laws”? Look at laws that are on the books everywhere. Those were peddled as “common-sense” laws. If they worked, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Alan Tanenbaum
Grantham
This year’s Christmas Mystery at Rollins Chapel was the 102nd such pageant, a tradition that is among the oldest in the country. It seems, however, that few people, including current organizers, are aware of the origin of the term “Christmas Mystery,” which has nothing to do with the person chosen to portray Mary.
Mystery plays developed in medieval Europe as biblical stories told in tableaux with accompanying chants or songs; in this sense the term “mystery” refers to any of the mysterious or miraculous events of the Bible. (There is a corollary in the miracle plays, which typically focus on a dramatic miracle involving one of the saints.)
In recent years, both mystery and miracle plays have been revived professionally, though more commonly in the United Kingdom than in the U.S. With hope, in future years, there will be more exploration of the ancient mystery play traditions, such as the artistic and scholarly community of Hanover and Dartmouth would enjoy.
Diane Meredith Belcher
New London
The writer is a lecturer in music at Dartmouth College and music director at St. Thomas Church in Hanover.
I have a different view than Forum contributor Richard Andrews regarding the caption of the photograph of a couple choosing their Christmas tree (“Caption in Search of the Right Word,” Dec. 15). Rather than the 11 words he proposes, the four words used by the caption writer, “much back-and-forth,” perfectly capture the whole scene in a kind and light-hearted way. I might add to his proposed list the additions “sighing, pshawing, cajoling, whining, foot-dragging, laughing.”
Yeah, four words really said it all for me.
Gretchen Graner
South Strafford
It does seem a bit absurd to keep up this back-and-forth with Anthony Stimson. I must note, however, that his rebuttal of my letter rebutting his letter misses the point. Again. He referred to his “Ph.D. in Progressivism,” which he earned by observing the midterm elections, but he still fails to provide what I called for in my first response — that is, just who were the candidates who provided him with such an education? As the headline put it, “Some Specifics, Please.” There were none in his original letter, just as there are none in his riposte.
Sydney Lea
Newbury, Vt.
Editor’s note: It is long-standing Forum practice to limit back-and-forth exchanges to two letters per writer on a given topic. With this letter that limit has been reached.