Rename the crime to make crime go away?

Like many other people, I have become very frustrated by the gaslighting, misinformation and lying by omission. It is everywhere.

The writer of the letter on immigration, April 4, was accurate in one assertion, we need immigrants, a core principle this country was founded on. But he did manage to leave out the word “illegal” when criticizing another letter writer, in describing the people currently overrunning our borders. The current administration would prefer we not use the word illegal, and I have heard them refer to these folks as “new Americans.” If only it were true that we could simply change the name of illegal acts or uncomfortable situations, and that would make the problem go away.

Perhaps, instead of referring to someone who has killed another person as a murderer, we could refer to them as “lifespan reduction specialists.” That has a nice ring to it.

If we could apply the renaming concept to all crime, we could eliminate crime altogether.

Our immigration system is broken, plain and simple. Trying to make this, and other unpleasant realities, more “acceptable” by whitewashing is childish and deceitful.

— Pat McKenzie, Hastings

Colleges could help

President Biden is still pursuing student-loan forgiveness from every angle possible. I should think the colleges and universities would want to help and spare the taxpayer, and unburden themselves of the $840 billion in endowments they have collectively amassed over the same years these student loans were taken out. They are conspicuously quiet on the matter. I can only wonder why.

— Tom Gehrz, St. Paul

‘Propaganda’?

A recent letter accuses this paper of “propaganda” concerning a recent speech from the disgraced former president, Donald Trump. The writer is also upset because the report refers to many of Trump’s claims as “without evidence.” Well, if Mr. Trump had offered some evidence, I’m sure it would have been reported.

I am surprised that a Trump supporter would use the word “propaganda” in any relationship to Trump. I see that letter as an opportunity to declare a “propaganda” winner.

The Washington Post estimates Trump told 35,000 lies during his presidency. Probably low, but let’s take a few examples.

Shortly after Trump was inaugurated, millions of Americans took to the streets in protest, including a million women in Washington D.C. wearing P—- hats. The response from Trump propaganda: “They were paid protesters”, which was soon debunked.

A close advisor to President Trump coined a new phrase for propaganda, when Kellyanne Conway called them “alternative facts.” Which I actually prefer to the Soviet/Cold War-era term, propaganda.

Of course, there is “The Big Lie,” that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. (Again, a claim without evidence).

Finally, the storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Many in the “cult of Trump” say it never happened. They contend it was tourists who got out of hand.

Do you really want to use the word “propaganda” in the defense of the “cult of Trump”?

— Tom Leary, Mendota Heights

Define ‘a matter of seconds’

A recent letter-writer advocating the “advantages of safe storage” appears to have no concept of reality. The vast majority of parents and others realize that it’s certainly important to keep firearms away from their children, visitors, et al. However, the writer uses the anti-gunners’ favorite phrase “common sense” when dealing with proposed gun laws up for a vote. Let’s deal in reality here.

The letter writer said an owner can access their firearms in a “matter of seconds.” Define a matter of seconds. If they’re stored in another room when someone breaks in, it can take easily take a minute or two before anything is accessed. Then another period of time to load it and be ready for defense.

It’s a known fact that a perpetrator can reach a victim for assault within two seconds from a distance of 20 feet. So, who is benefiting from safe storage in that case? The perpetrator, of course, who will now have a clear advantage due to this totally unneeded and flawed law. If passed it will make those who obey it less safe than before while the alternative is to ignore the law, risk imprisonment but at least have a better chance to survive if a break-in occurs.

— Lee J. Christianson, Baldwin, Wis.