Thanks to your paper and the media for allowing further debate on the Second Amendment, or the right to bear arms.

Simply put, the Second Amendment as ratified in 1791 is obsolete due to advances in arms and weapons technology.

In 1791, it took a person several minutes, if not hours, to get ready and discharge a musket or hand gun.

With the advent of easy- loading guns, the right to bear arms as envisioned in 1791 quickly passed into history and should have been modified by the people of the United States to fit the technological advances in weapons and guns.

Modifying and amending the Second Amendment should be the goal of national legislation and Congress so that mass slayings are eliminated from the American landscape (“Man with assault rifle kills 26 at Texas church,” Star-Advertiser, Nov. 6).

Jay Pineda

Waikiki

—

What values make a ‘real American’?

I noted, with some wry amusement, the statement at the end of the article in which Donald Trump supporter Edward Odquina was quoted as saying, “As an ex-Navy guy, I decided to show him support and let him know that there are real Americans, real patriots here, who support him” (“Demonstrators have little aloha for Trump, Star-Advertiser, Nov. 4).

My question for Mr. Odquina is: To qualify as a “real American, real patriot” must one be a racist, bigot, misogynist, white nationalist and liar?

Steven Booth Songstad

Wailuku

—

Meager coverage of anti-Trump protest

The Star-Advertiser’s large pictures and boldly headlined coverage of President Donald Trump’s “Whirlwind tour” of Oahu were not inappropriate (Nov. 4). However, the meager coverage of the spirited anti- Trump Capitol protesters seemed totally unprofessional by contrast (“Demonstrators have little aloha for Trump,” Star-Advertiser, Nov. 4).

This is especially sad and inexplicable in a state that led the country in voting against candidate Trump and in expressing its opposition to the policies of President Trump, a divisive braggart and bully who flagrantly disregards the truth, as well as America’s Constitution, despite losing the popular vote.

Faye Kennedy

Amy Agbayani

—

Co-chairs, Hawai‘i Friends of Civil Rights

Clinton-DNC story lacked key details

It is unfortunate that the Star-Advertiser gave so much space to a one-sided description from U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of the relationship between the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (“Gabbard accuses DNC of rigging presidential primary for Clinton,” Star-Advertiser, Nov. 4).

Further reporting has provided much more detail on the agreements. NBC reported that in return for financial support, the DNC gave the Clinton campaign “input on some party hiring and spending decisions, but required they be related only to preparations for the general election … [and] left the door open for other candidates to make similar arrangements.”

The DNC was deeply in debt at the time. NBC also reported that the Bernie Sanders campaign signed a joint fundraising agreement with the DNC, but didn’t use it, i.e., did not provide any campaign funds to the DNC.

The actual agreement is now widely available. These details are necessary before one evaluates the accusation that the primary was “rigged.”

Meg McGowan

Makiki

—

Consumer Advocate ignored activist

Your article, “Attorney’s behavior draws attention of PUC” (Star-Advertiser, Nov. 4), shines a light on a state agency, the Division of Consumer Advocacy, which seems to operate without input from the consumers for which it “advocates.”

I am an activist trying to educate the public about the dangers of Hawaiian Electric’s proposed smart grid and smart meters.

Since the Consumer Advocate recommends to the state Public Utilities Commission what it thinks is best for consumers, I decided to try to make contact with them to discuss their views on the smart grid.

After many failed attempts to reach Consumer Advocate Dean Nishina by phone, I wrote a letter. After almost three months, I’m still waiting for a reply. He also has not replied to state Sen. Lorraine Inouye’s office, who tried to contact him on my behalf.

Someone needs to expose how this agency operates. Without public participation, opinion polls or surveys, how do we know whose interests are being represented, the people or HECO?

Ron Becker

Hawi, Hawaii island

—

State has lots of land to house homeless

In the article, “Search for vacant state land for ‘safe zones’ comes up empty” (Star-Advertiser, Nov. 2), we read how the state was unable to find land in order to create a space for Oahu’s homeless.

I wholeheartedly disagree. One-hundred-sixty acres would be enough land to house every homeless person in the state. There are thousands of acres of underutilized and unutilized parcels of land owned either by the state of Hawaii, counties or the federal government.

Nonetheless, earlier this month at the Hawaii Interagency Council Safe Zones Working Group hearing, Pua Aiu from the state Department of Land and Natural Resources reported having difficulty finding available land for homeless safe zones.

Unfortunately, all this means is DLNR doesn’t have the authority or the will to change the designation of those parcels of land. Therefore, I challenge DLNR to take another closer look. Residents of Hawaii and the homeless population deserve better. Where is the political will to solve homelessness in this state?

Rep. Gene Ward

House District 17