Cloudy
68°
Cloudy
Hi 80° | Lo 61°

Letter: Wake up, Senator Ayotte

I heard Sen. Kelly Ayotte on NHPR, speaking in a lecturing voice, expressing her out-of-touch belief that an out-of-state entity (Gabrielle Giffords’s gun-control effort) “can’t tell New Hampshire voters how to think.”

This is Ayotte’s reaction to a TV ad, sponsored by the former congresswoman, the victim of a high-powered gun assault.

Sen. Ayotte, wake up. Or, Sen. Ayotte, be honest.

Ninety percent of Americans want gun controls, especially those that reduce the number of bullets in a magazine. No one needs to tell New Hampshire voters how to think on this. We get the picture: mowing down people with machine-gun like rapidity is an insane capacity. Let us never forget the Newtown child victims. Only someone in the pocket of the National Rifle Association would cast her vote otherwise. You should be ashamed, Ms. Ayotte, very, very ashamed.

LYNN RUDMIN CHONG

Sanbornton

Same PPP Democrat pollster talking points. It is all part of the Monitor's and the Democrat party's Astro-turfing Kelly Ayotte. It is sooooooooo blatant. Its not working. I hope there is a huge backlash against against Jeanne Shaheen liberal extremist rubber stamp.

LRC, Assessing the entire context of a book, based solely on the cover, yields very unreliable information. The resident’s oft quoted “90%” comes with the same force of evidence as an allegation of moon being made of green cheese. This is another example of well-intentioned legislation neutralized by the insane details inside. Under this proposal if you lent a neighbor a hunting rifle, without a background check, you could be charged with a felony and this is just the merest example of citizen oppression measures within this proposal. That is why people who not only read to cover but actually read the inside are vociferously opposed to this edge- of-the-wedge progression toward disarming law-abiding citizens. Why not go to Central America, the Mideast, or Afghanistan and see how effectively you can disarm the citizens. You might be able to "pass a law" but disarm those citizens-I don’t think so. Where does this “machine gun” statement come from? My last read of the data showed there had never been a crime committed with the legally registered “machine gun” (fully automatic) until a cop went berserk and used one on his wife. Why do you fear a law-abiding citizen with a weapon more than you fear violent assailants, rapists, and murderers? Who is trying to get you to believe in that concept and why? Does that make any common sense at all?

Post a Comment

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