Gun bans harm more than help
In rebuke to Mr. Lasky’s letter to the editor on July 1 (“Gun decision disturbing”): The Supreme Court ruling recently is the correct one. Here is why. Washington, D.C. has had a ban on firearms since the mid-70s. The crime rate, especially murder, has skyrocketed during that time. The F.B.I.’s “uniform crime report” that is published every year confirms this. All countries that have imposed firearm bans have experienced the same thing. Higher crime rates.
What does Mr Lasky mean by people who “shoot innocent victims they thought were a threat?” I have kept a loaded firearm in my home for 25 years and have yet to shoot an innocent person, nor a guilty one for that matter. What this law does is to let innocent people protect themselves from violent predators, which the citizens of our nation’s capitol have not been able to do for the last 30 years. Why would a criminal comply with the law in the first place, especially a gun law?
To conclude, the Founding Fathers had always intended the Second Amendment to be an individual right as the Supreme Court correctly interpreted. Also, Mr. Lasky, what in the world does terrorism have to do with being able to protect yourself in this country? These two issues are not even remotely related. I would be happy to speak with you any time regarding these issues. Thank you.