2/12 Letters: Raleigh may a ‘best place’ to live, but not for those of us who need affordable housing

A housing nightmare

I have lived in Raleigh long enough to see it grow from a sleepy provincial town to a vibrant city that now tops “best places to live” charts. Something to be proud of!

The one vital element that seldom gets mentioned is the dwelling needs of the real people who make this city great: police officers, nurses, firefighters, teachers, city/state workers and others. Who builds homes for them when the smallest, oldest houses goes for hundreds of thousands and rents are shooting through the roof?

For many of us, the “best place to live” is simply becoming an unaffordable nightmare. It is way past time for Raleigh to come up with a master plan that covers all of its citizens’ needs.

Roland Menestres, Raleigh

Gun reform

As many lawmakers from both parties debate ways to reduce gun violence in the United States, the questions continue to revolve around greater restrictions on gun ownership and the Second Amendment. An opportunity may exist to both quantify the social costs of gun violence and address it through insurance coverage, while at the same time avoiding governmental limits on responsible gun ownership.

Currently, standard insurance coverage policies for homeowners address guns only once, in the event of theft.

Insurance should be required to cover liability and losses, including wrongful deaths due to guns. Insurance companies have actuarial tables for activities such as private flying and scuba diving, but not gun use.

Let’s treat the $2.8 billion annual cost from a risk perspective, just like we did with auto insurance.

David Needham, Raleigh

No to caucus voting

Caucus voting like that used in Iowa is fundamentally flawed and unfair, no matter how efficiently votes are counted.

To vote, one must show up at the time and place your district caucus is being held. There is no early voting. Voters otherwise engaged at that time have no vote. There is no absentee voting. Voters away from the district, such as those in the military, have no vote. And, the vote isn’t secret; group pressure can be exerted on voters at the caucus.

Primaries with runoffs and well-tested vote counting equipment provide all voters with a fair opportunity to make their choices known. Caucuses should be abandoned.

Morton Lurie, Raleigh

A one-sided process

Regarding Ann McFeatters “Time to cast off respect for Trump, Senate Republicans,” (Feb. 8 Opinion):

My goodness, is it really so galling that the other side was finally allowed to defend itself?

Little wonder that the author of this op-ed finds no fault with the orchestrated, one-sided, near-clandestine House process. The Senate impeachment trial gave equal treatment to both sides and, by refusing to seek a cure for an incurable work product, mercifully spared the American people.

For the record, most Americans remain friends while disagreeing. Shunning is not in our DNA, but yes, voting is.

Norm Robertson, Wake Forest

Too many lies

My political history is quite moderate, I have voted for both parties. However, sadly, I have stopped listening to President Trump because he has lost all credibility with me.

I realize that 20% of what he says is real and should be listened to and considered. My problem is the other 80% is a mixture of outright lies, gross exaggerations, vindictiveness, and even making things up out of thin air.

I am too old and tired to wade through the 80% in an attempt to find the 20%. We deserve more maturity then this.

Doug Jurney, Raleigh

Act like adults

This is meant for all members of Congress, all parties, and the executive branch of the federal government.

It is time to stop acting like spoiled toddlers, put the pacifiers away, act like the adults they’re supposed to be, and start doing what is best for the United States of America and the world — not what each one thinks is best for them as an individual.

Bruce Gray, Durham

Local protests

Having attended gatherings/demonstrations in Raleigh, — womens’ marches, Tuesday for Tillis, Moral Mondays — I find that the money and manpower spent to stop people from having yardsticks to carry posters on is ridiculous.

On the news I’ve seen men at similar gatherings/demonstrations carrying rifles and non-U.S. flags, and dressed in menacing paramilitary clothing. Apparently a 70-plus-year-old woman with a yardstick is far more dangerous to fellow protesters than armed men.

This is another small step in the repression of minorities and disrespect for dissent. Small steps can lead into bigger steps, .more and more of curtailing of normal activities and freedoms. Democracy is defined by our ability to dissent.

Regan Mensch Brown, Cary