|
| | | | |
|
|
No Common Sense
From: Chris Brose <krleese@cox-internet.com>
To: helent@hearstdc.com
Cc: editpage@seattle-pi.com ; joelconnelly@seattlepi.com
; joannbyrd@seattlepi.com ; thomasshapley@seattlepi.com
; solveigtorvik@seattlepi.com
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:45 PM
Subject: "Hats off to John McCain"
Helen,
I just read your op-ed column on John McCain and the "gun show loophole"
(Seattle P.I., Dec. 5th), and several things were painfully clear. I'll try
to be concise.
You have never attempted to buy a gun at a gun show, have you? Have you ever
even been to a gun show? I have been to several gun shows, and have bought several
guns. And each time, I had to go through the official paperwork and background
check.
I'm hopefully assuming for a minute that you're honest enough to acknowledge
that gun dealers have to follow all the same laws as they would if they were
selling guns at their shops (for a long time, the anti-gun crowd -- of which
you are gleefully a part -- would not publicly acknowledge that fact). You might
respond and say something about the gun show loophole being private citizens
who can sell guns without the buyer going through background checks. And you
would be correct, as far as that goes. However, it's at this point that common
sense needs to kick in to properly analyze the situation, and unfortunately,
I can't assume that you have any, at least not on the basis of anything I read
in your column.
First of all, the percentage of gun sellers at gun shows who are private citizens
is quite small. Next, you must understand that they are there to make as much
money as they can off the sale of any guns they might have. They are not the
least bit interested in subsidizing terrorists, or anyone else for that matter.
And no matter what other stereotypes you have gotten into your head about gun
owners, they have been flag-waving proud Americans for a lot longer than you
liberals (for whom it has become fashionable since about September), and are
the last people on the planet who would willingly help terrorists.
Next, you have to understand that private gun owners do not represent an unlimited
supply of cheap militia type weapons. At the last gun show I was at, the private
gun owners each had one, sometimes two guns to sell. There were hunting rifles
and shotguns, and one .22 target pistol.
At gun shows, it is possible to buy AR-15s, in various grades and levels of
quality, anywhere from about $700 to about $1500. My question to you is this
-- why on earth would a terrorist want to pay over $700 for a semiautomatic
AR-15, when he (she) could buy an AK-47 (capable of fully automatic fire) in
Afghanistan for about $50? Seriously, I'd like an answer to that question.
Way more kids die from car accidents than from gunshots, intentional or not.
Why don't I hear you, Tom Diaz, McCain, etc., screaming for "car control"?
Why is it that, in spite of the fact that .50 caliber rifles have NEVER been
used in crime, that you think it's such a good thing to ban them? Same question
for "assault weapons" (I'd really like for you to define what an assault
weapon is. I don't think you have a clue). Millions of people enjoy target shooting
with semiautomatic rifles, and you want us to pay the price for your insecurity.
Why is that? And what about the Second Amendment? You can't just explain it
away, not if you want to keep any intellectual integrity you might still have.
And I think it's time you face (or at least seriously look into) the fact that
everywhere in this country that strict gun control has been implemented, violent
crime rates are higher than in places where the laws have been more relaxed
(especially with regards to concealed carry permits).
I serve in the United States Marine Corps. I handle guns every day. They are
not evil. And because I serve, I have taken the oath to support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
I have taken that oath seven times. I have taken the trouble to actually read
the Constitution. I firmly believe that ignorance of the Constitution on the
part of citizens is an enemy of the Constitution, domestic -- especially when
that ignorance leads to feel-good measures that (a) are not effective and (b)
infringe on constitutional rights. And to the extent that you align yourself
with that cause, to that extent you make yourself an enemy of the Constitution,
domestic.
Sorry, I wasn't as brief as I'd intended.
Sincerely,
Chris Brose
xxx08 xxth Ave W.
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
krleese@cox-internet.com
915-2xx-xxxx
To Get Your Letters Printed Here
Click here and read submission guidelines.
|
|
|
