The Issue: America’s gun-control laws and the commercial availability of military-like weapons.
***
When our forefathers wrote our right to bear arms into the Constitution, the arms they referred to fired one bullet at a time and took a while to reload (“Adam Lanza’s Weapons,” Editorial, Dec. 18).
Our country was in its infancy and laws and civility were still being formed. In addition to personal protection, guns were used to hunt.
Protecting our constitutional rights is important, but common sense should prevail. The sale of these killing machines either legally or illegally needs to be addressed.
EPA
Anti-gun group Credo at Capitol Hill after Sandy Hook.
The need for anyone outside of the military or law enforcement to possess one is senseless.
Joseph Canevari
Lake Grove
We will use this horrific incident as a platform for a political argument, the resolution of which would, at best, be many months away.
We need immediate action to protect our children. Arguments won’t stop, God forbid, another murderer from firing bullets at our children.
An executive order that bypasses Congress banning everything from tanks to sling shots would not stop anyone from repeating this horrible incident.
It would be too logical to propose armed defense of schools. Let’s just engage in rhetoric for months on end and allow another Sandy Hook to take place, God please forbid.Barney Rinaldi
North Kingstown, RI
When the Second Amendment was written the modern weapon at that time, the musket, could fire maybe two rounds in one minute.
Now that we have weapons like the AR-15 that can fire over 400 rounds per minute, might it be time to stop hiding behind the right to bear arms and have a real discussion on gun control?Brian Rathjen
Rockville Centre
Schools are gun-free zones, which make them targets for the insane.
The only way to stop lunatics is trained, qualified citizens with concealed-carry permits afforded these rights on school grounds. The police will never arrive in time to end it, obviously.
Lou D’Agostino
Queens
We are seeing more of these large-scale shootings by sick individuals with easy access to firearms designed for warfare. It is past time for our leaders to take charge of this catastrophic situation and do something about it.
A ban on private ownership of automatic and semiautomatic weapons would be a good place to start. No one has any need to own weapons designed to kill so many people except police officers and the military.
The Second Amendment just does not apply anymore and needs to be changed or rescinded. We are not living in the 1700s. Wake up, America. Innocent people are needlessly dying.
Robin Wieder
East Rockaway
Once again, the rhetoric in the wake of another mass murder turns to political showmanship. In each one, the shooter is armed with military/law-enforcement grade weapons.
Why was a single suburban mother allowed to buy and own a Bushmaster and a Berretta?
Those weapons are designed and manufactured with one target in mind: people.
Peter Seymour
Pleasantville
I was crushed to read that the editors of The Post decided that it is they, and not the Constitution, who should decide what has “no legitimate place in American society.”
I look forward to the next editorial telling us that our government’s attempt to wipe out the Indians, slavery, and the Japanese internment weren’t really government tyranny, and we don’t ever have to worry that any of that will ever happen again.
John Dumary Jr.
Duanesburg
Guns in our households: protecting or killing us?
This article
Guns in our households: protecting or killing us?
can be opened in url
https://bargainingnews.blogspot.com/2012/12/guns-in-our-households-protecting-or.html
Guns in our households: protecting or killing us?
