PG, you can't have it both ways regarding Big Brother

Written by Rosa Colucci on .

I seldom find myself in agreement with the PG's editorial staff; however, your July 13 editorial "Under Surveillance: Big Brother Is Still Watching Americans" is precisely in concert with my thoughts on the unwanted role of big government.

The Founders, President Washington and the common man detested the idea of a large central government and especially one that would have been as intrusive as those of Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Mao Tse-tung, Ho Chi Minh and Kim Jong Il. I agree that abuses under the Patriot Act (including placing Sen. Ted Kennedy on the "no fly" terrorist list reported by the PG previously) are unacceptable. One tenet of American life has been that the accused always has an opportunity to face his accuser. That concept has obviously been forgotten or ignored. Violations of constitutional guarantees to free speech, assembly, freedom to worship and freedom to seek redress of grievances under the First Amendment place a dark stain on the fabric of those who govern us.

On the other hand, the PG has furiously supported, among other blatantly anti-gun proposals, the Pittsburgh ordinance that would require a gun owner to report a stolen firearm within 24 hours. This is yet another instance of encouraging government to single out firearms owners who lawfully possess guns. Why do you encourage government to separate one group from another? This is just another extension of the flawed logic of discrimination against patriotic and law-abiding citizens, and then mock surprise and shallow outrage over the monster created by an increasingly intrusive local, state and federal government.







Join the conversation:

To report inappropriate comments, abuse and/or repeat offenders, please send an email to and include a link to the article and a copy of the comment. Your report will be reviewed in a timely manner. Thank you.