Constitutional rights

I’m compelled to respond to the letter by Carol Ann Bone. First of all, the United States Constitution says “shall not be infringed.” The Constitution doesn’t say you can only own one gun, or one type, or have limited magazine capacity.

She mentions “gun control” and says people don’t need a lot of guns. What’s her problem with me owning multiple guns? I can only use one at a time, but I enjoy shooting several different types of guns, including rifles, shotguns and pistols, also different models of guns from different manufacturers. Does that somehow make me a threat to other private citizens? The obvious answer is no, it does not. Why is there a problem with me owning any kind of gun, with any magazine capacity? There simply is none.

I’m not the one she needs to worry about. There’s an old saying that goes, “When you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.” Yeah, it’s a cliché, but it’s also absolutely true. She says our state isn’t a war zone, and people don’t need “repeater rifles.” Our state isn’t a war zone, but it does have bad people in it, and bad people can simply drive into your neighborhood and try to kill you and take your property. It happens virtually every day. And, trust me, they’ll be very well-armed.

If a law-abiding citizen wants to own a semiautomatic rifle to defend their home, why is that a problem? Remember: law-abiding citizen. When you make laws restricting a citizen’s right to defend themselves and their family, you’re just making it easier for criminals to do their evil deeds. Gun laws only hurt those who obey the law, and have absolutely no impact on criminals who refuse to obey them. Instead of restricting peaceful citizens, why not greatly increase penalties on repeat-offender violent criminals? Don’t take away my constitutional right to protect myself and my family with whatever kind of gun suits me best. Punish the bad guys.

MARK DAGUE Bentonville