Share this article

print logo

Letter: Limiting certain weapons does make residents safer

Limiting certain weapons does make residents safer

The recent letters that criticize the SAFE Act are the usual fare espoused by gun zealots, long on generalities and anecdotes and short on specifics. I am a gun owner with 54 years of experience. In that time, I have seen the direction of the gun industry and its marketing partner, the National Rifle Association, and its effect on our society.

That 41 states have easy access to carry pistols, and only four have sought some control over high-capacity military-style rifle and pistol killing machines, is no accident. It’s fully orchestrated by the NRA through state legislatures. With that background, I commend the State Legislature for the SAFE Act. This was not a popularity contest, but serious legislation for a serious problem.

In my experience, guns and ammunition can be purchased freely since the law was passed, all completely legal. The SAFE Act hasn’t changed anything of import for self-defense.

Forget the number of town and county governments opposing the law; my guess is they know more about vote getting than they know about guns. And, yes, limiting the number of high-capacity military-style rifles and pistols in circulation does make us safer, and the rest of the country should do the same. Just ask the parents of the children who attended Sandy Hook Elementary School. Please dispense with the harangue about the Second Amendment and loss of freedom. All rights are subject to a sanity test.

Adding insult to injury, the gun makers are now selling a pistol version of the assault rifle that could easily fit in a kid’s backpack. Samuel Johnson famously penned: “[False] patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

Peter Leyonmark

Hamburg