May 21, 2013 Updated: May 21, 2013 at 9:25 am
Majority pay for benefit of minority
People avoid downtown mostly because of the parking problem and the homeless problem. The Sky Sox used to play at Memorial Park years ago then moved out east. There are 40,000 registered Sky Sox fans out of more than 500,000 citizens. Why do we all have to pay for the benefit of the few who will be using the new stadium?
Why not spend that money - which the city does not have - to fix the stormwater system instead what will benefits all citizens and not just a few?
Just like the Southern Delivery System ... every household in Colorado Springs has to pay a yearly increase of 15 percent in water cost so the east side of Colorado Springs (the Banning Lewis Ranch) can be developed. Why does the majority of citizens have to pay for the benefit of the minority? To relocate the stadium to downtown will not bring more people downtown. It is not the location that prevents people from coming to the games but the interests of the population. And the parking again will be a problem as well as the homeless people who have the right to sit at our intersections begging for money so they can get their next bottle of booze or shoot up drugs.
Petra Hughes, Colorado Springs
We keep coming back to things
There is no reason to move Security Service Field. Moving to the other side of town makes no sense. The cost to the taxpayers would be big and serve no real gain except to the builders. You move the ballpark and open up land for development. This town is so small it takes no time to go anywhere in it. Powers is easy access and the parking is good.
With all the problems why do we keep coming back to things previously rejected?
Rodney E. Hammond, Colorado Springs
The real Colorado heroes
The defenders of corrupt state senator John Morse repeat the gun control lobby slogan that Morse's bills were just "common sense." However, 52 of Colorado's 64 county sheriffs have joined our own El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa in suing to stop Morse's unconstitutional and unenforceable laws. Those county sheriffs are the real Colorado heroes.
Since there is no record of who undergoes the background check, or for which guns, there's no way to prosecute criminals for not having a background check when they illegally buy, borrow, or steal a gun. They can't be prosecuted for the misdemeanors they commit when they get the guns they use to commit felony robberies, assaults, or murders. When the gun control lobby "discovers" this "loophole," they have the argument that gun registration is required to make the background checks work. Maybe that's what they mean by "common sense."
Eldon Dickens, Colorado Springs
Attention to possible remedies
News coverage of and opinions voiced about Kermit Gosnell's house of horrors clinic in Philadelphia have generally left out something very important: The fact that so many poor women in need of abortions could find no accessible alternative to this disgraceful outfit. The remedies: comprehensive sexuality education in public schools, ready access to contraceptives and family planning services, abortion providers that meet decent medical standards (as most do), broad compliance with the new health care law's mandate for insurance coverage for contraception, and, lastly, serious attention to the poverty that is increasing in our country and the growing gap between the small percentage of the wealthy and all the rest of us.
What the vociferous anti-choice and anti-Planned Parenthood movement doesn't grasp is that good comprehensive sexuality education, readier access to contraception and the reduction of poverty would actually shrink the need and demand for abortion, especially procedures after 12 weeks.
Finally, it needs to be recognized that the anti-choice movement is actually seeking to impose their unscientific and unbiblical, patriarchalist, religious opinions on all women, in violation of women's religious freedom and rights of conscience.
Gary King, Colorado Springs
Citizens do have a right to know
I agree with David Evans in his letter May 13.
We have a right to know all the details and facts concerning the Benghazi embassy: Why wasn't the embassy properly secured? And why was their no effort to rescue the embassy personnel. Some very high government officials are guilty of either gross negligence, gross incompetence, cowardliness, or putting political considerations above lives of those killed and endangered that night. Yes, we citizens have a right to know. I just hope The Gazette does not join others in the main stream media who, sadly, cast all their integrity aside and seek to cover up wrongdoings and protect responsible parties rather than expose them. We have a right to know.
Marvin Brooks, Colorado Springs