Cloudy
46°
Cloudy
Hi 52° | Lo 29°

Letter: Eight plans to diminish the carnage

So if we are to have gun control, how will we do it? What sacrifices need to be made, and will this be an imperfect solution that will nonetheless deter and diminish the carnage? What is wrong with any or all of the following:

1. Ban assault weapons for sale, possession, trade, etc.

2. Ban multiple-discharge clips.

3. Have a buy-back program for assault weapons and multiple-discharge clips.

4. Make possession of assault weapons and multiple-discharge clips a crime.

5. Require background checks, hunter safety courses, and gun safety courses for all owners of all weapons, no matter how defined.

6. Require that guns be kept under lock and key when not in use.

7. Ban concealed weapons. Period. There will be no exceptions. Wouldn’t you rather know who is packing so you can walk away than unexpectedly be confronted by your legislator, or a stranger who is armed?

8. Make a well-reasoned and thoughtful exception to patient confidentiality, and require mental health professionals to report to law enforcement authorities individuals who they have reasonable suspicion to believe are or will be violent, and who have access to weapons.

Shouldn’t we realize that the articulation that “we’re defenseless, come kill us” is about as paranoid as it gets? After all, what are our tax dollars for regarding police protection?

Shouldn’t we eliminate the bad guy versus good guy discussion, and instead focus our attention on the future as dictated by the past?

Finally, in terms of protection of one’s home, is it not wiser to own a large (think German shepherd or Rottweiler) or small (think Jack Russell terrier) dog that would deter more and be forever vigilant, without reducing the homeowner to abhorrent behavior?

ROBERT A. STEIN

Concord

I have never been threatened in any way by the thousands of concealed carry men and women who live in New Hampshire, but I was threatened by a dog owner who, on a misty morning a few years ago set his dog loose in my direction across an open field. I had not done one thing to merit it, and I think it might have been some crazy form of practice- I have no idea. The dog looked like he had been given an attack command, had all the body language that said "I am going to tear you up" and he was running full-tilt at me. I crouched and clanged my hand weights together, and the dog's human idiot companion signaled for the dog to come back to him. I know that almost all dog owners are responsible, just like most gun owners. It is not fair to condemn all dog owners or gun owners.

The puppets of the $44bilionaires will just filibuster any kind of assault WMD ban. If they could I think they'd lift all weapons bans and equip their 2nd amendment remedy lemmings with M16s for when, or if, they eventually drive the Reagan/Bush runaway tax cut/debt train over the cliff. The only way to stop bad billionaires with guns is good guys with votes.

Please check out black box voting website and a movie- I think it is still available in sections online, maybe youtube- "Hacking Democracy" . Apparently, most voting machines- whether optical scanners or touchscreen- are not very tough to hack, and vote hacking softwear has apparently been around for years.

Dear Maroons -- nobody is talking about taking away your guns (except FOX New$, a/k/a Chicken Little; a/k/a Sedition for Sale). Mr. Stein's proposals for "bans" are prospective, meaning from now on. You can keep your assault weapons and your high-capacity clips and magazines, but by stopping their sale, we make them that much less available to the next umpteen generations of paranoids. (And BTW: the 2nd Amendment was all about protecting the fledgling American government, and NOT about arming against imagined tyranny. Just sayin'.)

Robert...you may think of yourself as thoughtful and kind, but I think of you as spokesman for the mean and ruthless. You see, there is a lot of truth in the idea that an unarmed society is a weak, subservient society. And, your ideas have at least TWO major problems: 1) trying to take the guns from tens of millions of gun owners...well, that is too ridiculous to discuss (many won't give them up willingly); and 2) having any type of guard dog will increase you home owner's insurance.

Thanks Mr. Stein for giving us the perfect example that proves what I've known all along: the folks who want to ban guns don't have a clue what it is they're talking about.

Ban, ban, ban......The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms. With progressives Hell bent on taking away rights, even curbing free speech, I will proudly own and use my guns. Thanks for your absurd suggestions.

Dear Mr. Stein, by thrice using the word "Ban" you have indelibly stamped yourself a bad guy in the eyes of the Second Amendment purists. I for one do not know what a "multiple discharge clip" is and believe the term discloses a lack of technical expertise on the writer's part. I, too, think that several types of devices ought to be banned or severely restricted, but before one can ban / restrict he must take pains to create a generally acceptable definition.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.