Letters to the Editor 04/18/2016

To the Editor:

Just trust us?!

I read and re-read all the articles in the May 4 issue of The Nugget and here's what I learned. We are told "some" people (do we even get to know how many?) were not happy with our city manager because they felt he was "harassing and bullying" them (to do their jobs, maybe?) and we got so riled up about this that we formed committees, put him on leave, hired an impartial investigator who found the offenses to be inconclusive (a report the public can't see because it would be EMBARRASSING to the remaining employees) and then regardless the "conflicting evidence" in the findings, we now have the resignation of the best city manager this town has had in a very long time.

Sisters has never looked better and, to get great things done in a timely manner, sometimes feelings get hurt or some people get jealous. But most towns get beyond that because their officers, leaders and staff are adults. It is no surprise then that the City of Sisters had to accept Mr. Gorayeb's conditions of resignation (and give him a reasonable severance) because obviously the efforts to fire him were wrong-headed and we paid for it.

To say that the meeting which should have been public was not because it was so stressful council forgot to make it public makes one want to know how dumb council thinks we are. And lastly, to say that the public will know that the council only has the best interest of Sisters at heart is the worst joke of all.

And now we should trust council to be reasonable? The way I read it, the city manager was not the problem.

S. G. Cobb

• • •

To the Editor:

What a shame that it appears the city council has allowed Sisters to be the latest victim of Gorayeb's bullying.

Judy Bull

To the Editor:

Sisters VFW Post 8138 and American Legion Post 86 are again honored to sponsor Memorial Day 2016 at Sisters Village Green at 11 a.m. on Monday, May 30.

This is the 150th anniversary of this national holiday, which was established originally to honor Civil War soldiers who died in the conflict.

This year we will be privileged to have in our audience Bob Maxwell, who is the oldest living recipient of the Medal of Honor (World War II).

We invite Sisters residents to attend this special event. A barbecue will follow the service.

Bill Anttila

Commander

Sisters VFW Post 8138

• • •

To the Editor:

I recently read the essay "Dawn and Mary" by Brian Doyle about two women who died trying to stop the shooter at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Last week's article in The Nugget Newspaper, "Arming Teachers" by Craig Rullman, tries to make the case that if these women were armed they might have been able to stop the gunman. He says we "need to have this conversation . . . in the most realistic terms possible." I agree.

So let's imagine, as Mr. Rullman asks, "if one of those teachers was also armed." Imagine you're the teacher at Sandy Hook in the first classroom where all 15 students were shot and killed. You have a concealed weapon. The killer comes into your room with the gun pointed towards you. You immediately see the threat, reach for your gun (concealed under your jacket, not in your purse or in a drawer), but the gunman, using a weapon that fires a bullet every two seconds, shoots you multiple times before you can even think. How else is this scenario going to play out?

Believe me, Mr. Rullman, I understand, and I think most of us do, the "horrific consequences of violence." Of course, we understand. And I don't want to be a "sheep" hiding while kids are being slaughtered all around me. And I would feel safer hiding behind a gun. Of course, I would. But, I'm not safer and perpetuating the myth that more guns is the answer detracts us from finding real solutions.

So while we're having this conversation in the "most realistic terms possible," let's talk about real solutions and not just parody the NRA's only talking point: watching violent Hollywood movies and video games makes the US more violent - ignoring the fact that these movies and games are watched all over the world.

The NRA wants us scared.

They want us to buy more guns.

Let's talk real solutions like banning all semi-automatic weapons.

Begin with a buy-back program that worked so well in Australia.

Why do we need bullets that go through walls and car doors? Why do we need high capacity magazines? We should at the very least think of ways to slow down shooters so they can't kill 15 children in 30 seconds.

Guns should be licensed like cars and the owners tested on their use and safety.

I could go

on.

But, let's be honest. Some gun rights advocates don't want to talk about taking away guns because how will they defend themselves from the government? So we continue on down this road: more and more guns, more and more gun violence because we have to be prepared to defend ourselves from an imaginary threat instead of dealing with the real threat we face right now.

But we can have our freedom and still try and stop bad guys from getting guns. The two aren't mutually exclusive. The rights of a minority of gun owners with paranoid personal visions of what America should be shouldn't outweigh the rights of the rest of us to live in a society where mass murders aren't an almost daily

occurrence.

Terry Weygandt