To The Readers' Forum:
I am very disappointing in the editorial "Hunters Are Silenced In Gun Debate." Since I have over 25 years of experience in this area I believe I am qualified and deserve a chance to be heard. The paper missed the whole point of the debate, which is very unfortunate for a paper to do. It is a Constitutional issue first and foremost.
The editorial stated that two-thirds of the 13.7 million hunters are not among the NRA's 4 million members. Well, that is changing rapidly because of recent gun control efforts. Just because one is not member of the NRA does not mean that he or she is not passionate about the Second Amendment. I am sure I talk to far more gun owners and hunters than the paper does.
The paper also stated that the NRA is an extremist organization because it defends our constitution when many others have assaulted it. What other Constitutional articles are you willing to compromise on? I thought the paper's role was to report and let the people decide.
Who is the paper to decide what type of firearm people should hunt with? Who is the paper to decide what type of firearm people can use to defend themselves and their families with. Who is the paper to decide what type of firearm we could use to target shoot with? Who is the paper to decide what type of firearm I should have in my home? Who is the paper you do decide how many rounds of ammunition I should have in my magazine in my own home?
I would assume that when the paper does an editorial it makes every effort to talk to those who have some experience regarding matters that are printed, so let me make this perfectly clear. Out of the dozens and I mean dozens, of law enforcement officials that have come into my store in the past two weeks, (sheriffs, state police, FBI agents, JPD, DEA, conservation officers, prison guards, etc.), not one, I repeat, not one believes that these recent gun control measures will do anything to prevent a deranged individual who is bent on committing some atrocity from doing so. That includes the enforcement agency responsible for enforcing these new laws. They don't have the time nor the inclination and they do not agree with more laws on the books and would like the ones enforced that we already have.
Ten dead, 12 wounded by a 16-year-old prescribed 60 mg/day of Prozac. A 16-year-old on Paxil holds 23 classmates hostage and has no memory of it. A 13-year-old kills his aunt while taking Zoloft. A 13-year-old hung himself in his bedroom after taking Zoloft. A 12-year-old murdered both his grandparents while taking Zoloft. A 15-year-old on Prozac and Ritalin shot his parents while they slept after beginning Prozac treatment. A 15-year-old stabbed his grandmother 61 times after 5 days on Paxil. A young man on Ritalin chopped up his parents with an ax, and on and on and on. Maybe the paper should check this incidents out to find out who the real killer is. Are the guns the problem or is it our social decay?
So I say, what is the point. All of these gun control laws are nothing more than a "fool's placebo" and many are falling for it. Its the typical government reaction to just about every problem they encounter. If one horse isn't doing its job you whip all the horses. A very few individuals have the ability to negatively affect over 300 million of us. You have a right, a duty, and hopefully the courage to protect yourself and your family with every means possible. And that includes a black military type weapon. You don't have right to tell me what I should or should not own. Guns don't kill people, bad people kill people with or without a firearm.
Bruce A. Piatz