After reading the letter regarding the possible need for stricter gun laws, I feel I must bring a little common sense to this discussion.
First, the premise that more, stricter or more invasive laws would solve a crime problem. I assume this is in response to the recent home invasion and shooting, which are invariably are the result of some act of violence.
If I understand the story, one or more perpetrators broke into a residence, shot the occupant, stole a vehicle, ran from police, crashed through a gate and evaded police by running on foot. If my math is correct, that is at least seven laws broken, several of which are felonies.
Does anyone really believe one more law would have made a difference? After all, criminals always obey that one more law - right?
Secondly, why are we not blaming the perpetrators?
I own several firearms and have yet to see one of them self-motivate and harm anyone. Let's put the blame where it actually lies. On the perpetrators.
Thomas Burnett, Conway