Re Jan. 7 letter by Bernadine Bader, “Reinstate Assault Weapons Ban”
That said, I don’t feel that any changes in current gun law would have made any difference whatsoever. Limit magazine capacity? The mad man would have simply carried more magazines. Ban assault weapons? By definition, an assault weapon is fully automatic; they have been illegal for the general public to own for decades. Banning a rifle that looks like an assault rifle along with banning high capacity magazines would not have saved one life in that school. To think so is asinine.
That person shot his own mother multiple times in the head; that is the action of one sick person. If semi-automatic weapons were banned, he would have found another way to perform his deadly act.
Ms. Bader, you stated in your letter that, “pull the trigger once and mow down a room full of first graders.” With a semi-automatic that is impossible. You pull the trigger once, it fires once, period. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to firearms. Either become educated about the subject you are addressing or remain silent about it.
You mention the tragedy at Columbine, perpetrated by two twisted individuals. That crime took place in the middle of the ban on high capacity magazines. It had no effect on the outcome.
The tragedies you listed in evidence: Columbine, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood and Aurora all took place in so called, “gun free zones” where the law was broken several times prior to the first shot being fired. The only thing these gun free zones prevent is the ability for law abiding citizens to defend themselves and others.
Ms. Bader, stop being so naive. We must all work together to prevent these crimes from being committed by finding what caused these individuals to act in the way they did, not by preventing millions of people from exercising their constitutional rights.
The writer lives in Little River.