Expand background checks for guns

October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, a time that brings awareness to the lives lost due to domestic violence and the role of guns in so many domestic violence homicides.

Expanding background checks is a common-sense approach to curbing so many senseless deaths. Our current background check system only applies to about 60 percent of gun sales, leaving 40 percent (online sales, purchases at gun shows, etc.) without a background check. This makes it far too easy for dangerous domestic abusers to get their hands on guns and harm innocent victims.

In recognition of Domestic Violence Awareness Month, let’s call on Congress to pass pending legislation to expand Brady background checks on gun purchases, like H.R. 1565. Locally, Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D) and Rep. Chaka Fattah (D) are co-sponsors of the Bill, along with three other Democrats and two Republicans from the state. Nationally, there is bi-partisan support for the Bill. Certain gun rights organizations, however, will do what they can to defeat it.

If you agree with expanding background checks on guns, let your representatives know. Your voice matters!

Lynn Selhat

Chestnut Hill


Raising wages for contract employees

If you think that everyone already pays high taxes, why vote to increase your taxes,which will be the result of Councilman Goode’s referendum?

If you raise those wages, will you raise the wages of other employees who had been promoted already to that higher level by earning it? If you vote to raise wages, how will you feel when companies layoff some of those employees since legislating higher wages does not also legislate more revenue to pay the higher wages?

If you know that these give-aways of citizens’ taxes cause employees to be laid off, discourage companies from coming to our city and return less revenue to operate our city services, shouldn’t you vote “No?”

If we already pay several big taxes for everyone to be educated, whose responsibility is it then if one’s skills earn only a low wage after going to school for 12 years on our generous financial aid scholarships, i.e., school taxes?

If taxpaying citizens sacrifice their own money to pay school taxes, how can the moralists previously quoted in the Local impose their rigid moral judgement and civic guilt on generous citizens to pay even more taxes to pay higher wages for people who already squandered hundreds of thousands of citizens’ dollars for education?

If one is unable to support one’s children, society has numerous citizen funded safety nets: subsidized housing, earned income tax credits paid for by citizens, LIHEAP, food stamps, medical charity at hospitals, clinics and community health centers also paid for by other citizens to help the less fortunate, in addition to free schools for 12 years!

Let us turn to a sounder ethical, moral and fair middle ground, as those clerics should have turned toward in a previous editorial, that requires responsibility, learning in school, family planning, personal initiative, personal pride, working to earn a raise and getting married before having children.

Politicians give away other citizens’ money with gleeful and reckless abandon, but that is the opposite of some basic integrity our city needs. The most responsible and sounder moral and ethical vote for all our citizens is to vote “No.”

Gardener Cadwalader

Chestnut Hill


‘Thank you’ for Bone Appetite

I would like to thank the Bone Appetite pet products store in Chestnut Hill for its continued support of animal rescue organizations. Its owner and staff have graciously opened their door to numerous animal rescue organizations, including ours, providing a much-needed venue to connect great rescue animals with responsible and loving adopters. This store is an example of what makes Chestnut Hill such a great community.

Brenda Malinics




Let’s listen to each other

I just received another of many emails verbally bashing the President of our country. And it was from a beloved family member. It came on the heels of spending several hours with a longtime friend who claims to watch a News Channel reporting only the News that is not politically correct. In other words, his words, “the truth.” Most of what he reported to me was ugly.

Why would I want to hear worse than what is on the regular channels? And in the midst of this year’s campaigning I hear more verbal bashing between the opponents who are running to take a position of leadership. So, having hit a nerve, I am fired up.

How far back did this behavior start? Can’t I hear a candidate at least try to sell me on his or her own merit, not pointing fingers at their opponent?

The campaign to stop bullying among our young people, the next generation to leadership, is everywhere. Haven’t these campaigns been a form of bullying?

I get the passion in achievement and the enthusiasm to share one’s beliefs. The politicians, the religious leaders, the sports fans, all seem to have selective hearing. We all speak and hear the same language but we interpret it so differently to get to our place of achievement.

Listen to yourselves. Listen to each other. Our differences need to be a productive exchange of ideas and respect to move forward.

Alice Schonwald

Lafayette Hill


Hair article was shear hilarity

I work in Chestnut Hill, and I read the article by Mary Gulivindala about hair weaves (Oct. 24 issue) at lunch, and my entire office at work heard me laugh from the first floor. I could understand everything she mentioned in the article to be true or relevant to life issues around the world today about having long or different hair.

I’m African American, and I really enjoyed the article. My co-workers and I read the Local every week and pass it around in the office, and I think this is the best article I have ever read in this newspaper.

Thanks for enlightening the world on the “World of Hair Status in Society.”

Althea Harris

Mt. Airy