Killeen reader responds to previous letter calling for gun-control laws
To the Editor:
RE: Salado reader calls on Congress to enact gun-control legislation
Mr. Liles’ letter in the Oct. 7 edition asks Congress to enact more gun-control laws.
First, this is a fine example of gun-control supporters using the latest tragedy to push forward their agenda.
Next, I do not think that he is aware that there are more than enough laws on the books today, both in the states and the federal government. Enforce those to their fullest extent and at least some of the tragedies would have been prevented. I also think that he is unaware that during the reign of President Barack Obama, prosecutions of crimes for the gun laws on the books actually decreased.
If you look closely, most of the mass shootings happened where guns were not allowed — schools, clubs selling alcohol, etc. In the case of the Las Vegas shooting, there is not a lot you can do in a situation where a citizen who is able to buy and possess weapons and ammunition, does so and then very carefully plans an attack from more than 300 feet above a crowd.
He was able to do just what he wanted. He created panic in the people attending the concert. I do not think the numbers have been released that talk about those dead of gunshot wounds and those who died by being trampled by the crowd.
I will agree with Mr. Liles on one thing. The “bump stock” is something that should have never been sold. In fact, I believe that the “bump stock” should have never been invented.
I do not agree with his take on semi-automatic rifles. The definition of semiautomatic is that one pull of the trigger fires one bullet. I sincerely doubt any hunter would put a “bump stock” on the weapon and put 30 rounds into a deer — just wouldn’t happen. Are there nut cases out there who would? Certainly.
Suppressors (not silencers) are available today. It just takes some paperwork, and a few hundred dollars to buy the stamp. The legislation proposes to move suppressors to a lower category and be able to buy them in a gun store. The reasoning is to lower the noise from firing a weapon, for the shooter.
Mr. Liles writes about a “grotesque misunderstanding” of the Second Amendment. What he is referring to is the Supreme Court’s Heller decision. That decision made it clear that the Second Amendment sets forth an individual right to keep and bear arms.
The fact is that liberals have had their collective panties in a wad over this decision since the day it was released by the court.
It is the law of the land, for now. Yes, it could change at some time in the future. But that is only speculation.
Again, to reiterate, there are sufficient laws on the books now. They just need to be enforced. That would be a good fight for liberal and conservative alike.