Mr. Todd Melcher tells us in his letter of Sept. 26 we shouldn’t state opinions on subjects that we know nothing about. Mr. Melcher would do well to practice what he preaches. First, I’d like some explanations as to why Melcher feels that “Officer McGruff is under no obligation to protect individuals.” I know that McGruff is a guy in a suit, but surely you could provide a court case where the Supreme Court has made it illegal for law enforcement officers to protect citizens? Puh-lease. Next, Melcher tells us that two million times per year, firearms are used to defend the innocent. Without a source I find this number quite incredible. I have a few statistics I dug up from the March/April 1996 issue of Mother Jones magazine (a magazine known for telling the truth to debunk lies such as the one you try to get us to believe). The Violence Policy Center, FBI and the Department of Health & Human Services compiled these statistics in 1993: For every one American killed by a firearm in self-defense, 63 commit suicide with firearms. Sixty are killed in homicide by firearms. Six die in firearms accidents. One firearm death is undetermined. Multiply these numbers by two million, if you wish. Next, Mr. Melcher tries to tell us about some stuff that happened a long time ago, as if that will excuse the present-day Republicans of their sins. Anyone, even those of us who are not students of history, can tell you that there aren’t many people still alive from the 18th century. Most Democrats I know are less than 300 years old. So that pretty much means that what happened then cannot be blamed on any current living person, regardless of party affiliation. Next, he goes into the familiar rhetoric about how the Republicans freed the slaves, the party of Lincoln, etc. I would suggest you look beyond the label “Republican” and “Democrat” at the real ideologies. Nowadays, Republicans are more conservative, and Democrats are more liberal. This was not always the case. Until very recently, the roles were reversed. The Republicans (at the time of Lincoln) were the starry-eyed liberals. The other parties played the conservative bogeymen. I am not advocating we use the history of the parties to determine which one is correct now. Frankly, that’s dumb. Nazism started out as a political/economic reform party, and look what happened there. To decide on which side of the fence to sit, look at what each party is doing now. I think the current plague of Top Ten Lists in the Daily are an example of people looking past the labels and trying (admittedly without any evidence on either side) to prove their points. I think Lincoln would approve. Keith Twombley

Sophomore

Computer science and philosophy