A right to not be terrorized
Re “What’s next for gun laws in state?” Jan. 25
Of course I am saddened by the recent rash of shootings in California. I continue to wonder how this is not treated as a safety issue requiring restrictive new rules. I understand that many citizens cling to their individual right to bear arms, as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment. However, there have been many instances in which people have sacrificed their rights or been inconvenienced in order to save lives.
Many people were upset when laws were passed requiring seat belts and motorcycle helmets. After 9/11, there were many policies enacted that effectively restricted some of our freedoms. I remember years ago a man tried to board an airplane with a bomb in his shoe. Because of that, we must remove our shoes to be screened at airports.
The safety of society requires more restrictions on guns. We need more gun control now. Joel Jamison, Carpinteria
I was a longtime resident of California and am now shocked and saddened by the recent mass shootings.
I don’t agree that complete gun control is going to help. I live in a weapon-carry state and am often armed when going to church or any public event.
There is no way a legally armed citizen is going to stop a mass shooting. However, it is true that if said citizen doesn’t get shot himself, he can take out the shooter before he kills more people. I recall the case of the man in a Texas church who stopped a mass killer in his tracks.
I am all for background checks. I also think that assault weapons should be used only by the police and military. Most of all, we need better mental health treatment and better plans for keeping weapons away from criminals and children.
Willie Olmstead Powder Springs, Ga.
As a proud Asian American veteran, I know that evil comes in many forms and in many languages.
California has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. Maybe it’s time to empower the people to defend themselves against evil.
California already requires background checks, waiting periods, testing requirements and more. Repeating the same steps expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity.
John Tor Los Angeles
It’s being said that these mass killers all have one thing in common, and that’s possession of guns.
They have more than that in common. These shooters are all men.
Why is this defining aspect repeatedly ignored in coverage and legislation of these terrible tragedies? Where is any discussion or resolve to address this fact? No one talks about it other than to report that these men were angry, isolated and then just snapped.
If abortion is considered murder by many, and new restrictive laws to access it are in place in many states, why can’t men who seek and collect weapons be forced to abide by more stringent rules when acquiring guns?
Mary Fischer Los Angeles
With more guns than people in this country and access easily available to anyone seeking weapons capable of mass killing, we have to accept the fact that gun violence is part of American culture.
It is not going to be prevented by restrictive laws anywhere. We just have to learn to live with it — and perhaps to die randomly because of it.
Allen J. Manzano Carlsbad