Photo smacks of agenda

The picture on your editorial page today (Sequim Gazette, Sept. 19, page A-10) of the veteran holding the “Stop Trump Vote Democratic” sign is a blatant political ad. To suggest that he does not have an agenda is ludicrous. He has a specific agenda — as does this paper, apparently.

We are watching the destruction of a good man and worthy jurist by the media today in national news. The lack of reason, accountability and honesty is outrageous. In a small way, you bring that same lack of objectivity to our community.

I honor the veteran and his service. He has definitely earned the right to express his opinion. I would remind him and your readers, however, that, in the words of Tip O’Neal, the late Democrat icon: “All politics are local.” If you don’t like what is going on here, vote for the challenger.

In our case, the challenger is, more than likely, not a Democrat. The Dems control most partisan political offices in our community.

Pepper Putnam

Sequim

Library proposal worthy of this vote

Living in a rural area such as ours, internet connections can vary according to location. I believe this makes our libraries of utmost value and importance to all especially if one happens to be undergoing an effort to improve themselves with distance learning or video instruction which often requires significant streaming capability.

Before I had my own paid internet, I used the Sequim Library several times a week. My ability to effectively study there was challenging because its lay-out was designed for a smaller population than Sequim has today. Because power outlets located near tables and chairs are so limited in number, I routinely brought my own extension cord.

As you might imagine, snaking a cord between other tables and chairs can pose a tripping hazard. Worse, when all the tables are occupied, I’ve had to find an unoccupied chair in the children’s section or some other impractical location. I ended up spending a lot of money patronizing coffee houses because it was easier to find a seat and plug in than at the library.

I’m voting yes on Proposition 1 and 2. This nominal investment by owners of real property will cost less than $5 a month and benefit many, especially our students. And it’s cheaper than a cup of coffee.

Jill Varvell

Sequim

A new library for Sequim?

If you visit the Sequim library at almost any time of day you will find the library crowded with people of all ages vying for space to take advantage of the myriad of services this small library offers. Visitors complain about the crowded stacks, lack of meeting and study rooms, computer availability and access to resources.

In spite of this, the Sequim library staff receive kudos for their responsiveness to all requests that come their way and for the ever expanding number and variety of programs and services the library offers.

A new Sequim Library will mean dedicated study rooms, meeting rooms for classes and public meetings available during and after library hours, quiet areas for those seeking an area to read and study and dedicated space for young children and teens. Visitors will be able to move about without bumping into others and will likely find a chair at public meetings instead of standing.

If you are not a library user and wonder why you should support the Proposition for a new Sequim library, visit the NOLS website to learn the ways this library serves you and your community.

Voting yes on Proposition 1 and 2 will cost you $5.81 a month for a home valued at $300,000; a small price to pay for a vital and essential part of our Sequim community.

Elaine Fredrickson

Sequim

‘No’ on Initiative 1639

If you heard a prowler in the middle of the night, who might be a burglar or worse, would you want to be forced to run and unlock your weapon before you could protect you wife and children?

Well, this is one of the many requirements specified in Initiative 1639! Also, another condition: the initiative states that if this prohibited person gains access to your firearm, you are “criminally” liable.

So, of course, this leaves a homeowner no choice but to lock up their weapon and leave their family unprotected. This is coercion in its most obvious form and probably unconstitutional.

You will also find in this initiative that law enforcement agencies are directed to collect and store information on purchases and “transfers” of guns without limits on how this information may be used. This also puts our personal data at risk and opens the door to government “registry” of guns and gun owners.

Law enforcement may also verify, after these purchases or transfers of weapons, to “take steps to ensure” that the owners no longer possess these weapons. It is not specified how this will be enforced but doesn’t rule out mandatory confiscation.

Does this mean (like Hitler’s brownshirts) law enforcement will be allowed to enter our homes to obtain any weapons? Very scary!

Travis Williams

Sequim