Editor:

I read with disappointment the Shooters Committee on Political Education (SCOPE) changed Senate Candidate Johnny Destino’s rating. John Peracciny, Co-Chairman of Niagara County SCOPE, justified the downgrade by noting that Destino’s campaign “is being supported by officials that, in our opinion, are anti-gun owner and anti-Constitution.” This was quickly picked up by Rob Ortt who spoke of his A-plus rating at the expense of Destino.

What Rob Ortt and John Peracciny won’t tell you is that Rob Ortt is being supported by Republican Senator Dean Skelos.

The same Dean Skelos listed prominently on the New York State Republic Committee website (which has been sending out bush-league misleading mailers to Orleans County residents concerning Johnny Destino).

And the same Senator Dean Skelos that has an F rating from SCOPE.

SCOPE is not consistent. Downgrading Johnny Destino’s rating because SCOPE doesn’t agree with who is supporting him, while ignoring the support of Rob Ortt by Senator Skelos with his F rating is disingenuous.

The same goes for Rob Ortt – passing along SCOPE’s downgrade of John Destino while accepting the support of Dean Skelos comes across as the end justifying the means – and a winning at any price mentality.

Working to help preserve the Second Amendment rights of Orleans County voters needs to be based on consistency and facts.

Tom Klotzbach
Waterport

Editor:

The Hoag Library is a pillar of the community and symbolic for learning and developing. I am writing to inform the community at large who is served by the Hoag Library about some basic facts of interest for citizens and, hopefully, patrons of the library.

The Hoag Library is chartered as a “Cooperative” library, also known as a Free Association Library. This designation is one of three different types of public libraries allowed under New York State law. The key feature of this type of library is independence.

As an association, the Hoag Library is owned and managed by a non-profit organization, chartered by the New York State Board of Education, not by a municipal government or school district. Further information can be found on the New York State library website (click here).

Elected members of the Hoag Library Board of Trustees should be able to address and answer inquiries about the bylaws of this cooperative association and the authority by which they oversee the Hoag Library, including personnel and budget decisions.

While voters give elected officials the privilege to serve the community and represent the people, the Board of Trustees has an obligation to the community to be transparent in their governance and be held accountable to all the citizens and the community in which they serve.

Five staff members, including the director, have been terminated within the past six months. The experience, stability and knowledge of this tenured staff spanned 130 years. They were loyal to their customers, directors and Board of Trustees (current and previous) and certainly were familiar and helpful to any patron who visited the library. They will be missed by many, and a void of institutional knowledge and history is now gone. My challenge to you is “who is courageous enough to ask, ‘Why?'”

Complacency is the act of being pleased and satisfied with decisions that are being made for you and not wanting to make them better. If you say nothing with these decisions, then you are in silent agreement with the decisions.

If citizens are not satisfied with the actions of the Board, they are encouraged to attend the Hoag Library Board of Trustees meetings, which are held the second Wednesday of every month and provide their public comments. The minutes of these meetings are published on the library website (click here).

The bottom line is that because the Hoag Library is an association library, taxpayers can vote specifically to support the library to best serve the community. Is the Board listening to you and are they hearing your concerns and opinions? Is the Board taking the library in the direction that best serves this community? Is there transparency in their governance, and are they held accountable for their actions?

All Hoag Library Board of Trustees meetings are open to the public. All meetings begin at 7 p.m. on the second Wednesday of the month at the library. The next scheduled meeting is Nov. 12.

Mary Anne Braunbach
Albion
Braunbach is a former library trustee and is currently president of the Friends of the Library.

Editor:

Why do so many people have such a problem with truth? Why do so many of us tolerate what amounts to bullying by abusive authority?

When my wife was fired (10/13/14), the new Hoag Library “Director” told her she was fired for abandoning her post. You be the judge.

On Saturday, Oct. 11, five teenage students appeared at the Library saying they were there for community service. My wife, Grace, called their teacher and found she was not coming in to supervise them. She then got the new “Director’s” phone number from one of his new replacement employees. She called the “Director” to inquire whether he intended to come in to work with them. His response was to immediately begin his customary, heavy-handed verbal harassment of her for doing what needed to be done, contacting the teacher.

Grace was even told not to wait on a patron while he continued to berate her. (All this came from a “Director” who had earlier told the staff, “If you see a problem, you own it.”) At that point, she was needlessly reduced to tears in a public place with a public audience. No one deserves such treatment, particularly not a 30-year employee.

At this point it would be well to recognize at least four things. The first is that the parents of the students likely assumed their teens were doing community service under adult supervision for 2-3 hours. The second is that the Hoag Library’s new “Director” has one face for the public and another for many dedicated employees. The third is that three experienced staff members have left in the last month. The fourth is that this is about what is best for The Library, not Grace.

As the day wore on, Grace gradually developed a nasty headache. After 5 hours, she arranged coverage for 2 hours and went home. She told an employee she was sick and needed to leave and they agreed to cover for her. She notified the “Director’s” secretary by e-mail that same day. Employees have used such arrangements to obtain coverage for years without a policy. The new “Director” never dictated any change in this practice.

When Grace went to work on the last of her 30 years of Mondays, she was terminated by the “Director” in the typical ridiculous way people often are these days (“Give me your keys and empty your locker.”).

What does any of this have to do with the truth?

Though the “Director” said he was terminating her for “abandoning” her post, the real reason is that, just as with the others who were pushed out, she had many years of service. Even though she worked only 13 hours a week, she, just as the others, was expendable for budgetary reasons.

The truth is that my wife has been a solid employee for 30 years. The truth is she has devoted hours of unpaid time, weekly, for much of that period. The truth is she volunteers as a “Friend of the Library” and has for years. She worked six hours today! The truth is she insisted we pay our pledge to the Library two years early. The truth is that she has found a serious buyer for the old Swan Library building.

The truth is that people in the United States don’t need to put up with bullying. But we do every time we say, “There is nothing we can do about it.” How many times have we said just that in the face of authority being abused?

Assuming that all the nonsense going on at The Hoag is “much ado about nothing” does a disservice to your community. It is wishful thinking. If you value truth, justice, and your Library, call a Hoag Library Board member to find out what is going on.

Gary Kent
Albion

Editor:

This is a Response to Tom Rivers’ challenge to NYS legislative candidates in his editorial on Oct. 20, 2014 (Candidates don’t have much to say about Orleans County, rural NY).

As I see it, the issues identified in Mr. Rivers’ editorial are symptoms of a problem created 101 years ago. Democrats and Republicans are not going to solve this problem. They created it.

Let me first outline the 101-year-old problem: The problem is our current system of taxes. When Democrats and Republicans ratified the 16th Amendment and imposed an income tax, they took the wealth of our nation and gave it to a few hundred people in Congress to use as they see fit: The biggest theft in history.

In the process, the structure of our society that was designed and created by the U.S. Constitution and intended to be preserved, that structure was destroyed. Look at the structure of our society today. You are not a free person: You are required to report your earnings every year to the government. Why? Because every penny you now earn belongs to the federal government, thanks to the Democrats and Republicans.

Congress now gets to tell you how much of their income (that you earned for them) that you get to keep and how you must spend their money that they allow you to keep. If you spend it improperly, they will take more of their money from you. You see symptoms; Our tax structure is the problem.

Your wealth is the property of the U.S. Government. Consequently, lower governments are left to their imagination to figure out how to grab what they need of your wealth: State and local income taxes, sales taxes, real estate taxes, fees, fines, surcharges, revenue generating charges, red light cameras … an endless list. If symptoms of distress appear in a community, and you want a solution, the major political parties’ solution is, fundamentally, more of the same but on a grander scale. Take more of your money and give it to someone else.

With the money flowing to Albany and Washington, the major role of an elected official today is to bring the money back to their district. My opponent is proud of the $33 million he obtained for Genesee County’s 77 Stamp project. Democrats are proud of the billions going to Buffalo and New York City. Every elected official across the state is proud of the numerous grants given to their towns and villages. And now, according to the editorial, Orleans County is also seeking a bigger piece of the financial pie as a solution to its problems. Seriously?

What would I have done? What will I do when I get into office? I would have voted against the 77 Stamp project. Any act where the government takes and distributes your earnings is tyranny. Thousands of such tyrannical projects exist across the state. I will work to end this tyranny and leave your earnings in your hands. I will work to establish a proper, constitutional way to fund government. A consumption based tax system, a sales tax system, is a system where government has a direct interest in making sure commerce and enterprise is thriving. And, that brings us to the issue of tourism and commerce.

New York State is grossly failing to meet Orleans County’s and the surrounding counties’ infrastructure needs. For example: Route 531 should be extended to Niagara Falls and developed to serve Holley, Albion, Medina and all of the northwestern upstate towns and hamlets along the way. The abandoned Ontario Parkway should be taken to Niagara Falls. The entire shoreline of Lake Ontario should be developed so that it can be enjoyed by tourists and residents, with new pull-offs for tourists, commercial development, and private use.

Want to solve Orleans County’s problems? Fix the 101-year-old problem. End both federal and state income tax. If we do, the role of government will automatically become limited, focused on the needs of its citizens, and we would quickly return to the structure originally crafted and established by the U.S. Constitution, where you, as an individual, will become free and empowered again to implement your own solutions.

Mark E. Glogowski, Ph.D.
Hamlin
Libertarian Candidate
139th Assembly District

Editor:

Facts the extreme gun crowd won’t tell you:

Polls continue to show 90 percent of New Yorkers, including a majority of NRA members, support background checks.

Eight American children are killed every day by guns.

Two-thirds of New Yorkers support the SAFE Act, and DO NOT want it repealed.

The SAFE Act has withstood legal tests in state and federal courts.

The SAFE Act remains the law of New York.

The SAFE Act keeps assault weapons with large ammo capacity out of the hands of cop killers and first responder killers.

The Second Amendment has never allowed, nor was it intended to allow unlimited rights to obtain all manner of weapons.

I urge all registered voters to check your candidate’s position on the SAFE Act and vote for those who favor it and common sense gun laws.

Thank you,

Al Capurso
Gaines
Member of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence (nyagv.org)

Editor:

To prevent the implementation of the political worldviews that historically have always led to tyranny, two financial barriers were placed in the U.S. Constitution. In 1913, when the Democrats and Republicans ratified the 16th Amendment, they trampled on and crushed those two barriers.

In the process they destroyed the structure of our society that the U.S. Constitution was designed to create and preserve – a structure where you were empowered to provide for and defend yourself and family. The two major parties today are pursuing worldviews where government dominates and controls society – worldviews formerly blocked by the financial barriers.

The SAFE act is a typical efforts supported by those worldviews: A shooting at a school in another state justified the passing of a bill in the middle of the night – no debate, no proper notice, no input from the many state agencies affected, creating unconstitutional restrictions on your owning, purchasing and using a weapon, restrictions on weapon designs, and even unconstitutional confiscation of weapons. Were our elected officials terrified, or was there another motive?

Consider a person getting a rash from poison ivory and then government passing laws limiting where you can go (not the person with the rash), who you can interact with, how you must dress, medical care you will be required to receive, restrictions on your ‘driving privileges’ (you might be distracted if you see a person with a rash), penalties for parents of anyone having a rash (obviously bad parenting) … Get the idea?

These are responses to ‘symptoms.’ Not one response addresses the problem, the source of the rash … the poison ivy plants in the garden. The shooting is a symptom. It is not the problem.

The Second Amendment gives every citizen the right to carry a weapon – loaded, unloaded, concealed, not concealed – anywhere they deem necessary to protect themselves, their family, and neighbors. It even provides one reason every citizen has an obligation to carry a weapon. How does the SAFE Act, restricting your ability to defend yourself and family, address any problem? It doesn’t.

You interact with a criminal for about 90 seconds. Police arrive in 10 minutes. Nothing in the SAFE Act empowers you, as a citizen, to respond spontaneously to defend yourself. Sure, the SAFE Act addresses symptoms of problems, but not problems created by you; they are created by the worldviews embraced by Democrats and Republicans.

Mark E. Glogowski, Ph.D.
Hamlin
Glogowski is the Libertarian Party candidate for the 139th Assembly District.

Editor:

A few days ago a neighbor brought me SCOPE’s ratings and asked why it listed me as a B, while my opponent (Chris Collins) was given an A+. After all, my opponent was “accidently” a founding member of one of the groups that helped write the SAFE Act, and I, unlike my opponent, am one of the citizens who actually owns one of the guns made illegal. You would think on those facts alone, I would get an A and he would get an F. So why the discrepancy?

A few weeks ago Budd Schroeder, chairman of SCOPE, came up to me and introduced himself. He came up to me on his own, and introduced himself and asked me not to be too hard on my opponent. “He may have made some mistakes, but you don’t want to dwell on them. Just be civil.”

I had always planned on being civil, but I thought it was odd that the head of SCOPE would be asking this of me. A few days later, Budd introduced me to a SCOPE gathering as “a candidate for NY State Senate.” This was after he introduced my opponent as a close friend, whose son Budd taught to shoot his first gun.

Nevermind Collins being “snookered” into being a founding member of a group that supported the SAFE Act, he has done absolutely nothing legislatively to promote 2nd Amendment rights. I, on the other hand, have written and shared with SCOPE legislation that would help the cause. So why give him a better grade than me?

Because Budd is more interested in helping his friends than repealing the SAFE Act.

That’s not where it ends. I have been saying all along that the only way to repeal the SAFE Act in NY is to show all of the Democrats who are opposed to it, which I have learned from going around this district, is a huge number. I brought this up to Budd and said he should try to reach out to those Democrats.

This was his response via email: “I have friends who are Democrats. Some close friends. I am a registered Conservative and like having friends on both sides of the aisle. I am also on the Executive Board of the Erie County Conservative Party. Been a Second Amendment activist for almost a half century. Some habits are hard to break and I don’t want to break this one. Thanks for checking in. Budd”

By this comment, it is clear that Budd does not want to repeal the SAFE Act. It is the single greatest fundraiser for the Conservative Party ever. Budd doesn’t want that to end. I have sat through a few SCOPE meetings, unlike my opponent who received a higher grade than me, and during the meetings, I witnessed Budd and others offer flat screen TV’s to the groups who registered the most new voters as Conservatives. That is the only goal Budd has, growing the Conservative Party and thereby growing his influence.

People opposed to the SAFE Act: Stop supporting this man – He is wasting your money.

Sincerely,

Jim O’Donnell
Orchard Park
O’Donnell is the Democrat-endorsed candidate for NY’s 27th Congressional District

Editor:

After more than a century of providing library service to the Albion area, we were blessed, through the generosity of numerous donors, with the construction of a brand-new building in 2012.

The entire community takes pride in this new structure. Hoag Library is one of the most visible buildings in the village. But alas, things are not happy within this architectural gem in our midst. For whatever reason, it seems that the Library’s Board of Directors has chosen to “take a different course” in how to operate a library.

The first order of business was to harshly dismiss the long-standing director. The heartless and undignified method in which this took place led, in large part, to the resignation of a very valuable, and hard-to-replace, administrative assistant. Two days after the hiring of a new director, a 28-plus year employee left. Shortly thereafter, a 30-some year employee was “dismissed for insubordination.”

Other staff members have since tendered their resignation. The Friends of the Library group is so upset with the situation that they’re on the verge of disbanding. I’ve heard that some of the residents who pledged in support of the Capital Campaign for the new construction are withholding payment.

In a small community such as Albion great pride is taken in small accomplishments – WE raised the money to build the new library building – WE have one of the best public facilities in western New York – WE provide library service second-to-none, etc.

The current administration seems determined to undermine the countless accomplishments made by the staff that they’re presently getting rid of.

To the residents of the Albion library region I suggest (if you’re as concerned as I am ) you attend the monthly board meetings (held on the second Wednesday of each month at 7 p.m.) to voice your disapproval of the STATE OF THE LIBRARY.

Sincerely,

Joseph A. Gehl
Kent
Co-Director
Albion Betterment Committee

Editor:

The two corrections facilities in Albion are about as far from New York City as you can get; Westfield is farther. There is nothing the Assembly leadership would like to do more than close down the Albion facilities so New York City families would not have to travel so far to see their inmate relatives and friends.

Closing Albion is on the legislative docket almost every year. If the Democrat state leadership had its way, Albion would be closed (again), this time for good.

That’s why I was so puzzled at the suggestion that the Village of Albion should receive a buck a day for each prisoner housed at the two facilities. (“Candidates don’t have much to say about Orleans County, rural NY,” published Oct. 20, 2014)

Does the writer know the economic impact the prisons have on the area? Does he know the dollar value of the local salaries paid to officers and staff at the facilities? How about the money they spend in the community? How about the local merchants who do business with the prisons? How many years would it take to recover if the Albion facilities closed? Ask Assemblyman Hawley how he spells disaster.

Maybe the editor could write a letter to Sheldon Silver and ask him to close the prisons. The Albion sites already are not eyed well in Albany. The ill-advised suggestion that the community isn’t getting enough bucks from Albany could put the padlocks on the gates.

Ralph E. Smith
Lyndonville

Editor:

It seems that the news media is prompt to report stories with a heading that reads: ‘Inmate Charged with Assault on Corrections Officer.’ Yet, there was no news coverage to be seen last week for the jury trail of Jeremy J. Rothmund, 31, at the Orleans County Courthouse.

Rothmund, a former inmate at Orleans County Jail, pled not guilty to the charge of Second Degree Assault of Janet Koehler, a corrections officer at Orleans County Jail (10/16/13). If found guilty, Rothmund faced up to an additional seven years in state prison to the 15-year sentence he is currently serving for robbing the Bank of America in Albion on July 2013. It should be noted that Rothmund turned down a plea offer.

I’m disappointed that this trial received no attention, for indeed, the courtroom pews were empty.

Maybe this case just wasn’t exciting enough to report. Just another cut and dry case of a criminal acting like a criminal and Correction Officers performing their noble duties. After all, that’s how District Attorney Joseph V. Cardone summed it up.

However, after hearing the two and a half days of testimony of seven witnesses for the prosecution and only Rothmund in his own defense, the jury returned a verdict of “Not Guilty.”

“How so?” you may ask. Not so cut and dry, after all, it would seem.

I won’t elaborate on every detail, at this time, but I hope to be given the opportunity in the near future.

You see, this is not some isolated case involving only Jeremy Rothmund. I dare say it’s more widespread than we prefer to believe. It concerns the bitter truth that not everyone who wears the uniform of a police officer or corrections officer is worthy of the honor and respect that should be synonymous with such an important position of responsibility and power.

Aggressive arrogance is not honorable, nor is it respectable. Passing the general requirements to hold and perform such important duties is never a guarantee that an individual possesses the capability of dignified discretion. It’s a simple truth that deserves scrutiny.

I wish to thank Attorney Jon Ross Wilson for his diligent defense and pursuit of the truth, on Jeremy’s behalf. I have my doubts that the Orleans County Public Defenders’ Office would have approached this case as seriously.

Profuse and profound thanks must be given to the honest and open-minded ladies and gentlemen of the jury. You have revived my trust and faith in the judicial system. It can work when allowed to.

I also commend Judge James P. Punch for conducting a fair and just trial. That always helps.

Try to remember, friends, that a responsibility to the truth and a dedication to justice will bring satisfaction from both. Just a thought.

Sincerely,

H.J. Rothmund
Albion
Mr. Rothmund is the father of Jeremy Rothmund.

Editor:

I wish to thank Mr. Sambrowski for his views regarding the SAFE Act. He is right when he said, “We have met the enemy and they are us.” (State can’t legislate common sense with guns, morality, Oct. 7, 2014.)

That is precisely why we need laws that reflect society’s common sense and morality, our sense of right and wrong. For they are the letter and heart of every law our democracy enacted, including The SAFE Act.

However, I did NOT misrepresent the situation. It is a fact that two thirds of New York’s citizens support the S.A.F.E. Act (Sienna Poll, May, 2014). Mr. Sambrowski, I, too am a gun owner. And rest assured my children were taught personal responsibility including how to handle firearms safely and with respect.

I have heard your old, worn-out arguments before about how criminals don’t care about gun laws; therefore, you believe gun laws make no sense. You could not be more wrong. Consider the harsh reality that everyone is law-abiding until they gun down innocent children and teachers. Everyone is law-abiding until they snap and take out 25 people in a shopping mall.

Let’s focus on the real issue – namely the availability of assault weapons with large capacity magazines. The SAFE Act prohibits them. Gov. Cuomo is not coming after our guns, despite what I hear the extreme gun groups say. For more information about ending gun violence, I refer you to nyagv.com (New Yorkers Against Gun Violence).

Al Capurso
Gaines

Editor:

Bullying is all the talk these days. The problem is that talking, without acting, doesn’t get it done.

Though many people view bullying as a fact of life among younger people, it is clear that bullying is also prevalent among older people in the workplace.

Most of us understand that older employees perform vital roles across America in acclimating younger workers to their jobs. It is expected that senior staff persons provide guidance for those less experienced. In some cases they are encouraged to mentor. More often, helping the recently hired avoid unnecessary “hard knocks” and better accomplish an organization’s mission naturally happens without direction. It is an expectation nearly everywhere.

When a person with 30 years experience at one job takes the initiative to give a new employee a “heads up” on a potentially at-risk pre-schooler, that senior staff person is behaving logically. When the same 30-year employee sees five students show up for unscheduled community service – without a teacher – on a Saturday morning and contacts the teacher to determine what might be scheduled, that senior staff person is acting according to what a logical person would think is expected of her. In doing her job in these ways, such an employee can better avoid potential organizational liability for failure to act.

In the above – and other – cases, it defies common sense that the senior staff person’s “Director” would belittle and criticize such appropriate responses and berate, chastise, ridicule and otherwise bully the 30-year employee for doing what a sensible person would think was called for under the circumstances.

It may be hard to imagine a workplace reality in which people end up being fired for being responsible.

Where, one might ask, could such utter nonsense be taking place? Where could a 30-year employee get fired for standing up to a bully while doing her job as she always has?

It is certainly not too late for Albion’s Hoag Library Board to avoid a major mess.

When it comes time to decide whether to retain the Hoag Library’s new “Director,” let us be clear about one thing. Those who vote to retain him will be putting their stamp of approval on bullying, plain and simple.

Sincerely yours,

Gary Kent
Albion

Editor:

I’ve heard some disparaging remarks over the years about how we no longer need libraries and librarians – most often from people who should know better, and because they think the existence of the Internet has superseded the need for libraries.

Statistics alone show the need for libraries – library use is increasing, and has been so for a long time. One of the reasons for that increase is the presence of librarians in libraries of all types. Librarians serve as gatekeepers for all this new technology and knowledge.

Yes, Google and Bing and the like are useful interfaces to find information on the worldwide web, but not particularly useful in navigating the databases that are the new repositories of more specialized information. And Wikipedia has improved greatly, but does not claim to be more than it is – a huge online encyclopedia, and no one ever needed the librarian to show them how to use an encyclopedia – it is pretty obvious how it works. Checking the citations at the end of the articles will give you a pretty good idea about how useful the information is, as well.

But librarians perform many other tasks as well. The new graduates coming out of library school have a good grounding in the fields of computers and database searching, and that has only increased over the years. They also have a good grounding in the more traditional sources and services offered at libraries for the past century and more.

Librarians are still the people who catalog and organize information. They are also the people whose job it is to evaluate information sources in both book and other formats and disseminate the information both to other librarians and to the public. They work with other agencies to offer literacy classes in libraries – both print and digital, and teach patrons how to use those devices that all those clever people keep inventing; iPhones, tablets, e-readers and whatever new devices will come out of the inventor’s workshop next week. Librarians are the ones who are constantly re-educating themselves to use this new technology and introduce it to the public.

But librarians perform many other tasks as well. The new graduates coming out of library school have a good grounding in the fields of computers and database searching, and that has only increased over the years. They also have a good grounding in the more traditional sources and services offered at libraries for the past century and more. Librarians are still the people who catalog and organize information.

They are also the people whose job it is to evaluate information sources in both book and other formats and disseminate the information both to other librarians and to the public. They work with other agencies to offer literacy classes in librariesboth print and digital, and teach patrons how to use those devices that all those clever people keep inventing; i-phones, tablets, e-readers and whatever new devices will come out of the inventors workshop next week.

Librarians are the ones who are constantly re-educating themselves to use this new technology and introduce it to the public. At the same time those same librarians are helping people to use older technologies as well.

It is impossible to research genealogy without using print sources. Many sources have been scanned and are in the online databases, but not all, by any means. Local history is still mainly found in books and newspapers, and as valiantly as librarians have been trying to get all this material scanned and online, it is a very expensive and extremely time-consuming process. The largest newspapers are available digitally – smaller ones tend not to be.

Getting all that material scanned and available is an ongoing process, and an enormous undertaking, and it’s going to take time, and lots of it, before it becomes generally available, and the people who are organizing that work are librarians.

There is a reason why so many authors – people whose jobs require research, include librarians in their lists of people to thank for their help, and it’s not because the librarian smiled at them. It is because they helped find the needed information.

This is a world where there is more and more information being generated each day. The librarian is the one who can help you to get access to that information. Yes, you can answer the easy questions yourself, with your computer or smart phone, but you still need your friendly local librarian for the difficult questions. Celebrate your library and be glad librarians still work there – especially the next time you need help.

Susan Rudnicky
Waterport
Rudnicky is the former director of the Hoag Library in Albion.

Editor:

Over the past two years, I’ve been asked, “What’s a Libertarian and why should I vote for one?” If you asked 10 Libertarians, you will get different answers. Our core value is individualism – free thinking. We are guaranteed specific individual rights through the Constitution of the United States, and Libertarians advocate the protection of all those rights.

I’m also asked what our position on different issues. To answer that question, first consider a few basic questions. Ask yourself how, in general, you view other people. Consider those people you encounter every day. Are they generally good, decent, honest folks, who would share what they have with someone in need and help another who was in danger? Or, are they bad, scheming, selfish, and look the other way and not want to be involved in helping others in need? Next, ask yourself who should make decisions about people’s welfare? Are the people you know capable of making good decisions, or should they be prevented from doing so to protect themselves?

There are only 4 possible outcomes (Labels are as used today):

1) Folks are good and should be responsible for their own welfare. (Libertarian)

2) Folks are good but society (government) should be responsible for their welfare. (Liberal)

3) Folks are bad and society (government) should safeguard from bad decisions they make. Folks are, however, responsible for their welfare. (Conservative)

4) Folks are bad and society (government) needs to control them. (Authoritarian)

That’s it. Yes, it seems simplistic. There will always be gray areas. Free thinkers will disagree on finer points, naturally. However, the Libertarian’s position on any topic can typically be found by determining what solution would put the most faith in people and require the least government involvement.

With individual freedom, of course, comes responsibility. Unfortunately, Americans have become dependent on the state. The expectation is that government will solve issues. It’s easy to understand why. Government takes a chunk of everyone’s earnings right off the top through income tax. Add property tax, sales tax, license fees, tolls, etc. and it averages out to almost 50 percent of everyone’s income.

I use as a reference taxfoundation.org. You will work for over five months before your pay is yours.

Why are people still hungry, homeless, uneducated, and with inadequate health care? Is our system broken? Why is our country on the offensive around the world? Shouldn’t our defenses be better than anyone’s offense, especially considering what we pay for it?

The ancient Chinese philosopher Laozi said, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” You can take that step by voting for Libertarians. Libertarians can’t just turn a switch and make it all better but Libertarians will shrink government whenever and wherever possible.

We will enable the American spirit of independence, innovation and generosity, by getting government out of the way, respecting your right to make decisions for yourself, and stopping government from confiscating the fruits of your labor.

It will take time, but if you find that you agree with the Libertarian philosophy, that people are generally good and should be making the decisions about their lives, then register as a Libertarian, take a stand with us and make a statement with your vote. You’ll never regret it. Principles are powerful things.

David Olsen

Chairman
Genesee County Libertarian Party

Editor:

While I applaud Al Capurso’s concern for the innocents, I feel that his point of view is misrepresented in his support for the SAFE Act. (SAFE Act protects public and doesn’t infringe on Second Amendment, published on Oct. 3, 2014.)

Mr. Capurso asks about the rights of those innocents that are gunned down mercilessly. He asks, “What about their rights?” Well, truth be told, their rights mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING … to the CRIMINALS that perpetrate such atrocities!

The ONLY ones impacted by the SAFE Act are the law-abiding gun owners! Are we really expected to think that a gun-toting maniac, with an intent to wreak both havoc and terror, will “reconsider” perpetrating such an act, because he or she CANNOT carry more than a specified number of rounds … “LEGALLY”?

Has there been so much as one gang related shooting that we read about almost daily in Buffalo or Rochester newspapers that has been prevented, simply because the shooter did not have a “legal” handgun, or a permit to carry such a weapon?

Mr. Capurso, like you, I am also VERY concerned about the very same innocents that you mention. However, I disagree with you as to who the “enemy” is here. Law-abiding gun owners everywhere are just as concerned (if not more!) than you are over the heinous crimes that you cite because it casts an unsavory opinion of gun owners like myself! In other words, those who have no intent to commit a crime, do not need the SAFE Act to “regulate” our moral obligation as gun-owning citizens!

Awhile back, I watched Gov. Andrew Cuomo cry out very vehemently to “Stop the madness!” Well, I agree! Would you care to hear “my” opinion of madness? How about the gun amnesty program? This is where government agencies actually pay people for turning in their illegal weapons, as a means of “getting them off the streets.” In the process, they have created a market for gun thieves! Simply steal a weapon, wait for “gun amnesty day” and then turn in the guns that you stole for drug money or some other illegal purpose! Now that’s madness!

Mr. Capurso, the answer is NOT in creating laws, nor even in enforcing them. If this were the case, we would have no domestic violence. We would have no drug problem. Neither would we have an underage drinking or smoking problem! After all, do we not already have laws on the books that govern such issues?

In “my” opinion, the answer lies in teaching our children at a very young age something called “moral responsibility” and this can ONLY be taught them by practicing it ourselves!

I could write another letter citing the language that I hear being used in public, or simply the self-centered attitudes that adults demonstrate to their (and our) children on a daily basis. I believe that the answer lies in our citizens demonstrating something called “personal responsibility” for the actions we take each and every day, sir.

Let’s remember all the “innocents,” but let us also identify those who threaten their (and our) rights. More importantly than that, however, is that we carefully consider, not only the “rights” of individuals, but rather what is RIGHT for society as a whole!

I believe that a cartoon character created by Walt Kelly named Pogo, said it best many years ago: “We has met the enemy … and they is us!” One cannot “legislate” common sense, morality, nor consideration for others. Those qualities must come from within ourselves. Wouldn’t you agree?

God bless America!

Neil J. Samborski
Medina