GloucesterTimes.com, Gloucester, MA

Letters/My View

January 19, 2013

Letter: Lawmakers should reject gun law changes

To the editor:

This is a copy of a letter I have sent to our state legislative representatives:

I am writing to let you know I am opposed to the legislation filed by our governor regarding gun control.

The state of Massachusetts already has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. As a legal and responsible gun owner, I can’t help but feel I and others are being punished for the acts of those who have no respect for the law or the lives of others.

What we really need is criminal control. Time after time we read and hear of convicted felons, using guns to commit violent crimes, even after being convicted of multiple felonies, yet they still walk our streets and continue to prey on good citizens.

Commerce and trade are the foundations to a thriving and prosperous people. Limiting the sale of guns to one per month really is a pointless attempt to restrict free trade. After all, most of us can only afford to have so many firearms in our possession and if we choose to purchase them at one time that right should be unencumbered not restricted due to the acts of criminals or those with mental health problems.

Yes, we have a problem with mental health issues regarding firearms. And that problem is always going to exist regardless of all the rules and regulations printed on official documents of the state and federal government. A clever and determined person, with mental health issues, who is determined to do harm will always find a way to carry out acts of pure evil. And when this happens it seems the emphasis is to further restrict the rights and privileges of law abiding citizens who had no part of the wrong doing.

Thousands of people in this state enjoy going to an indoor or outdoor range and punching holes in paper targets, myself included. Some shoot handguns and some rifles. Why is an AR15 or similar firearm in the hands of a military person called a combat rifle, in the hands of a police officer called a patrol rifle, but in the hands of a civilian called an assault weapon? Seems the civilian term is a sinister indication of intent to assault. Same gun, different description.

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Letters/My View

NDN Video
Man Accuses 'X-Men' Director Bryan Singer of Sexually Abusing Him As a Teenager Lea Michele & Naya Rivera Feuding? Don't Be A Tattletale: Bad Bullying Tips For Students Jabari Parker declares for the NBA draft Singing Nun Belts Out Cyndi Lauper Swim Daily, Throwback Thursday The trillest thoughts on marijuana "RHOA" Star Charged With Battery Grizzly Bears Get Snowy Birthday Party Weatherman draws forecast when another technical glitch strikes WGN Elizabeth Olsen's Sexy Shoot Bay Area Teen Gets Prom Date With Help From 'Breaking Bad' Star Boston Bomb Scare Defendant Appears in Court Behind The Tanlines Jersey Strong Part 1 WATCH: Women Fight To Marry Prince Harry! Jenny McCarthy Engaged to "New Kid" Kate and Will Land in Oz O’Reilly Launches Preemptive Strike Against CBS Pixar Unveils Easter Eggs From its Biggest Movies Baby Sloths Squeak for Their Cuddle Partners in Adorable Video