Israel must be wary of Abbas

ISSUE | WEST BANK

Beware of Abbas

Trudy Rubin's analysis of problems on the West Bank is shortsighted ("Danger signs on West Bank," Sunday). She warns that Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' closing of the Oslo process will lead to increased tensions on the West Bank. She blames Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for being too focused on Iran at the expense of peace in his own backyard.

Rubin paints a narrow picture of a complicated problem. She implies that an attack on Israel by the ayatollahs is too unlikely to worry about. Iran's leaders have stated that they would be willing to absorb a nuclear counterattack from Israel if it meant nuclear destruction of Israel. No one who has responsibility for Israel's safety can ignore that threat.

Rubin also recalls being at the signing of the Oslo accords. She fails to mention that Yasir Arafat backed away from the accords and started the second intifada because he would not accept an independent Jewish state living side by side with a Palestinian state. Abbas has the same mind-set.

Her solution is for Israel to stop building settlements. That didn't work in 2009, and it won't work now because Israel is unacceptable to the Palestinians. Abbas' recent moves are his way of saying, "Don't forget about us." Sadly, what he has done in the past three weeks is a ramp-up to a third intifada.

Rubin needs to articulate an accurate analysis of the conflict and suggestions that both sides need to consider.

|Steven Barrer, Huntingdon Valley, sjbarrer@gmail.com

ISSUE | KATHLEEN KANE

Conflict of interest

While facing criminal charges of her own, Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane continues serving as a member of the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons, where the task is to objectively decide whether individuals found guilty of a crime should be pardoned or have their sentences reduced. Her continued participation is wrong, and she should withdraw.

While Kane is a prosecutor, she is sitting on this board as a judge, and judges must step aside when circumstances show even an appearance of impropriety, which arises when the reasonable observer might question a judge's impartiality.

What calls into question the attorney general's impartiality? Since Kane is facing criminal charges, the reasonable observer might fear that she would vote to deny pardons to project a "tough on crime" persona as she worries about her own case and how jurors and the public will view her. Regardless of the reality, that's how it could look.

The American Bar Association's standards make it clear that a prosecutor "should avoid a conflict of interest with respect to his or her official duties." Kane should resign from the Pardons Board until her charges are resolved.

|Jules Epstein, professor, Beasley School of Law, Temple University, Philadelphia, jules.epstein@temple.edu

ISSUE | COLLEGE SHOOTING

Time for reasonable gun control

Like President Obama, we are angry and frustrated at the failure on the part of Congress to enact real gun control. As he said last week ("Shooter kills nine at Oregon college," Friday), no other advanced country experiences these types of mass shootings every few months. Americans are far more at risk from themselves than they are from a terrorist attack. The odds are far greater of being attacked at school, at the movie theater, on the road, or at work.

While it's true that these attacks are the work of individuals with real mental-health issues, their ability to get guns anywhere in this country is frightening. The answer is not to arm more people, but to attack this issue on two fronts - mental-health resources and gun control.

A significant percentage of Americans want real and reasonable gun control. Congress needs to stand up to the National Rifle Association and do what's right. Business as usual is not an option.

|J. Patrick and Victoria K. McCloud, Voorhees

NRA's focus is misguided

The National Rifle Association was founded to instruct people about the safe handling of guns, especially rifles used in hunting. For rural folks, this was very important. A longtime friend grew up in Mason City, Iowa, and her father was the head of the original rifle association. He was a Quaker, and when the NRA changed to being a lobbying group for gun manufacturers, he resigned.

Today's NRA is merely a front for the gun industry, claiming that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was written to protect all gun owners, all the time, for all purposes. Any restriction, such as background checks, is anathema to this powerful lobby. The NRA, when confronted with mass shootings, claims the answer is more guns, not fewer.

No other first-world nation has the gun problem we do. Mass shootings have become the norm. We are losing more young people each year because of the proliferation of guns than any country that is not plagued by civil war or terrorism. And the United States claims to be civilized?

|Charlotte Glauser, Philadelphia

Public and leaders need to step up

After the massacre of 20 children at a school in Newtown, Conn., nearly three years ago, we mistakenly believed that our love for children's safety would blunt the power of the NRA and motivate us to action.

We were wrong.

After the slaughter of nine people at an Oregon college, perhaps we should open our windows and yell, "We are not going to take it anymore and we demand change."

Do we really love our guns more than we love our children? Our kids seem to be losing the battle.

In 2013, a bill calling for universal background checks for gun purchases nearly passed - so perhaps the invincibility of the NRA is gradually eroding.

Bernie Sanders has been ambivalent on the issue. Other high-profile politicians need to make their views known. They should take comfort in Terry McAuliffe's strong stand against the NRA, which did not prevent him from being elected governor of Virginia, where the NRA is based.

|Jagjit Singh, Los Altos, Calif.

Licenses could get a grip on guns

The United States starts with the premise that everyone may own a firearm and then tries to use various laws and rules to exempt some people from ownership. This is not working.

What if we change the paradigm to allow only people who show they have the skill, responsibility, and maybe even a valid reason to own a firearm?

Just as we don't let someone get a driver's license until he or she demonstrates certain capabilities, firearm owners should have to earn licenses and forfeit them for irresponsible behavior. This is already the procedure for the "concealed carry" permit, and I feel comfortable with those vetted, trained people having firearms.

The Second Amendment does not mention an individual's right to own firearms. (It refers to state militias.) An individual's right comes from Supreme Court rulings. While those rulings may prevent significant action on firearms control, licensing - with enough political will - could produce meaningful change.

|Greg McCoy, Chadds Ford

ISSUE | PA. BUDGET

Provide details

If the letter by Gov. Wolf's press secretary, Jeffrey Sheridan ("Stymied by the GOP," Sunday), was any example of the governor's negotiating style, it is no wonder we do not have a state budget well past the deadline. Rather than another ad hominem attack, I would have preferred to read the advantages of Wolf's budget initiative compared with that of the opposition.

|Ben LaGarde, Glenmoore