Hi 27° | Lo 4°

Letter: Aligned with extremists

Once again, Sen. Kelly Ayotte has aligned herself with the extremists.

Following her earlier attempt to assassinate the character of United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, she has now bowed before the gun lobby and voted against extended background checks for gun buyers.

This is the same Kelly Ayotte whose main claim to fame as New Hampshire attorney general was the successful prosecution of and death penalty sentence for Michael Addison. Addison, a felon, murdered a Manchester police officer using a firearm. I wonder if Officer Michael Briggs’s fellow officers and survivors approve of the senator’s vote.

This is the same Kelly Ayotte who stood shoulder to shoulder with mourners of Chief Michael Maloney of Greenland. Maloney was allegedly killed by another felon, with a firearm. How do Maloney’s fellow officers and survivors feel about the senator’s vote?

The flimsy argument against extended background checks is that criminals do not submit to background checks. Well, with all of the loopholes in the current law, we make it easy for criminals to avoid these checks. While it is arguably true that most criminals will illegally purchase their weapons, is the possibility that expanded checks might just keep a firearm out of the hands of some criminals, some batterers, and some of the mentally ill not sufficient cause to enact them? Isn’t one life saved sufficient justification? If not, this is a shameful statement about our country.

Senator, it is time that you vote to reflect the wishes of a majority of our citizens, and not those of the NRA. I hope it does not take another tragedy to change your view.



Legacy Comments2

More uninformed yap. The weapons used to kill Maloney were purchased by his girlfriend and/or stolen from his mother (and had been purchased by his deceased father). Please explain how background checks would have prevented him from gaining access to those weapons. As you pointed out, he was a felon and therefore not eligable to purchase weapons, yet he still had them. The argument that a change in the law would have prevented the shooting is nonsense. Criminals will get weapons regardless of the law, that is why they are criminals.

"Criminals will get weapons regardless of the law, that is why they are criminals." This perfectly summarizes the conservative fallacy. To follow pit's logic, all criminal statutes should be immediately repealed because murderers continue to murder, robbers continue to rob, swindlers continue to swindle, rapists continue to rape, drug dealers continue to deal drugs. Do you want a few hundred more examples?

Post a Comment

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