A dehumanizing analogy on guns and immigrants

After reading Nicholas Kristof’s heart-wrenching column (Feb. 12, “How Is He a Danger?”), about the plight of Syed Jamal, I feel compelled to respond to a conservative acquaintance who, upon learning of my liberal bent, asked me the following question. “Some liberals,” he said, “maintain that it is worth getting rid of every gun to save even one life.” Relishing his “gotcha” moment, he continued, “Then why don’t they ever say it is worth getting rid of every person who is here illegally if that would save even a single life?” Clearly, he thought this was an apt analogy and, thus, a clever illustration of liberal hypocrisy.

I do not advocate for the elimination of all guns, nor would I defend anyone who comes to our shores to commit crimes. However, I would ask what kind of person cannot recognize theobvious distinction between hunks of metal, all created to maim and kill, and human beings, who all have lives and families.

Many of these people have known no other home, and many, like Mr. Jamal, would be a credit to any country. For my acquaintance to assume that it is proper to discard both guns and people under the same test necessarily requires that he dehumanize and so devalue these good people based solely on their immigration status.

Sadly, this type of thinking is nothing new. Throughout history, and still today, the belief that certain people are subhuman and undeserving of basic human dignity has been used to justify their persecution. The slave trade and the extermination of Jews in Nazi Germany are but two examples.

My acquaintance seems to be a nice man; however, I cannot accept the analogy that he presented to me. Rather, I feel that whenever we willingly equate objects and people, for any purpose, we already abandon our own humanity. SHARON BRUSTEIN

Squirrel Hill

We welcome your opinion

After yet another school shooting, this time at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., it’s impossible to come to any other conclusion than this: The U.S. Congress has accepted gun violence against innocents as a fact of American life.

As citizens, we should not and cannot accept this.

Central to the American character is a resolve to improve ourselves; when we see a wrong, we work to right it. When it comes to gun violence, however, our elected officials stick their heads in the sand. Unfortunately, ignoring the problem does not make it go away.

No wall will protect us from the next shooting. No immigration ban will stop a violent sociopath from obtaining a small arsenal and inflicting carnage on Americans.

Only commonsense reforms can do that, and a commitment to improving our country through self-government. It’s high time our elected officials looked at this uniquely American problem with clear eyes. The safety of the American people depends on them doing so. MICHAEL McCUNE Dormont

Regarding the announcement from UPMC and the University of Pittsburgh about the Immune Transplant and Therapy Center (Feb. 14, “UPMC, Pitt Plan Center to Create New Drugs for Immunotherapy”):

While UPMC should be applauded for the recent cuttingedge investments in medical research and health care, I find it discouraging that there seems to be no investment for mental health services and treatment. It is estimated that almost 20 percent of Americans suffer from some form of mental health issues and yet we see no new money announced from UPMC for mental health.

Is outdated Western Psychiatric hospital the best UPMC can offer those who, through no fault of their own, suffer from mental illness? KURT ZIEGLER

Peters

A gentle reminder to all property owners: You are responsible for clearing snow and ice from the sidewalk in front of your home or business. (If it’s a corner lot, you are responsible for both sides.) Icy and/or slushy conditions on many city sidewalks in recent weeks have put pedestrians of all ages at risk for falls — and you, the property owner, are liable for injuries they might sustain.

City government, which makes much of its desire to promote alternative modes of transportation, would do well to enforce this regulation with fines in order to protect the rights and safety of pedestrians.

To all the good neighbors out there doing their duty: Thank you! S. LEVIS Point Breeze