Subscribe for 33¢ / day

"Once more into the breach, dear friends, once more." We've got to stop selling the semi-automatic assault rifles. Yes, there are millions already out there and I doubt we would ever recall them as they did in Australia. But stopping new sales would save some lives. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would save some lives.

The new generations growing up will not have access to these weapons unless they know someone who has one or they get one on the black market or they build one themselves. A determined person will get the weapon no doubt. But oftentimes the shooter has just purchased the rifle not long before using it on the public.

I'm not sure what the attraction to these assault weapons is. We already ban automatic weapons. Automatic weapons are regulated. Why not the semi-automatic weapons. The only argument I have ever heard about owning the AR-15's is in case of a foreign invasion. But that can't be a serious argument. That argument implies that our Army, Navy, Marines and National Guards have already been defeated. If that is the case, a neighborhood with a few AR-15's isn't going to stop a foreign army.


The "slippery-slope" argument is also ridiculous. I have guns and have been a hunter in my younger days. I would never approve the illegality of all guns.

Let's keep the single-shot weapons for hunting and home protection and stop sales of any new semi-automatic guns and save some lives. There is no reason for the public to have these semi-automatic military-style weapons. The Supreme Court ruling in 2008 (The District of Columbia vs Heller) that we can have guns "...unrelated to service in a militia" does not say guns cannot be regulated. Some guns are already regulated. Yes, the problem is both mental illness and the easy availability of semi-automatic weapons that can spray a roomful of people before anyone can react. The shooter has the element of surprise.

Other countries think we are insane.




Load comments