Published 12:00 am Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Arguments in favor of stricter gun controls …
The day after the killings in Connecticut, an acquaintance said, “What a tragedy.” He then followed up with “ Guns don’t kill people; people kill people.”
My response: “Tell that to the relatives, parents, and friends of the 26 people who were massacred.”
The reality is that guns DO kill people, the same way automobiles kill people. And, just as there are laws and devices to promote safer driving, we need better laws and devices to control guns.
Just as soon as “gun control” is mentioned, the NRA gets on its high extremist horse and tells its minions “they” want to take away all of our guns. Who do you hear saying they want to take away our automobiles?
While the NRA is suggesting arming teachers, putting more guns into schools will only serve to maximize the potential for further tragedy. I do not understand this logic of fighting fire with fire.
There may be adequate laws on the books, and they certainly need better enforcement. Unfortunately, there appear to be a gross number of loopholes.
Because no amount of legislation or enforcement is 100 percent effective, does that mean we should sit back and do nothing, or wait and keep revising until it is “perfect?”
There will always be a risk of other Newtown, Aurora or Virginia Tech episodes, but there is a definite need to minimize this.
While the second amendment states the right of the people to “bear arms,” I do not believe that rapid-fire assault weapons were what our Founding Fathers had in mind. Indeed, I feel that some of them may be turning over in their graves because of how out of control guns have become.
— Victoria Goga
Rockwell
… And against
The continued debate about gun control is not addressing the problem that brought on the use of a gun. The gun, type of gun or the size of the magazine is not the problem but the individual’s chosen solution to the problem. Those who massacre a large number of people see a gun or another weapon as the only solution to their problem.
We can have as many committees or commissions that anyone wants on gun control or the control of gun paraphernalia. These committees and commissions will not solve the use of a gun as the solution to a problem or a perceived problem by the perpetrators of crimes using guns.
If we wish to stop gun violence, we must first identify the problem that caused an individual to resort to the use of a gun as a problem solver. The problem can be real or it can be perceived; whichever it is, the perpetrator deems it a problem that can only be solved by causing death or bodily harm by using a gun or some other weapon.
The confiscation of all guns and gun paraphernalia will not stop individuals from committing crimes involving bodily harm or death. If the perpetrator deems that the only solution to their current problem requires them to inflect bodily harm or death they will find a way.
The question remains do we, as a nation, have the fortitude to identify, attack, and solve the problems that cause individuals to the resort to the use of weapons (guns, knives, clubs, sticks, chairs, rocks) as the solution to their problem? Or do we continue to skirt the problems and attack an inanimate object that has no control over how it is used?
— Ray Shamlin
Rocky Mount
Hit singer deserved a note
I was very disappointed that the Salisbury Post didn’t carry a story about the Dec. 26 death of Fontella Bass, who recorded “Rescue Me,” the No. 1 hit on the R&B chart in 1965. The CBS evening news found a slot to show its respect.
— Bobby E. Wesley Sr.
Salisbury

Comments

Comments closed.