I was puzzled by the conclusions drawn by Thomas Parrish and Bob Moore regarding gun control. How will “eliminating gun ownership... affect our national security?” We will still have the largest, most well-trained and technologically advanced army in the world to protect us. How, exactly, will removing assault rifles from a few ordinary citizens make a dent in national security?
Mr. Parrish claims he is scared of a tyrannical government rising to power and that we citizens will need our assault rifles to overthrow it. Yet, Mr. Parrish and his pals stood by with their guns doing nothing while King George (W. Bush) took most of our rights away by shredding the Constitution with the “Patriot” Act.
I agree that poor enforcement of existing laws, lack of prosecution for gun crimes, cuts to mental health treatment and glorification of violence in movies and video games need to be addressed. But we also need to address the availability of assault rifles, multiple-round magazines, and armor-piercing bullets if we truly want to solve the problem.
And I would like to know where Mr. Moore found his research proving that, “The only thing that stops and armed attacker is another man with a gun fighting back”? And what proof does he offer that “A few armed teachers would have greatly reduced the carnage in Connecticut”? Most of us are aware that mere speculation masquerading as “facts” proves nothing.
Furthermore, I was deeply offended by Mr. Moore’s characterization of people with psychiatric illnesses as “crazies.” This is a slap in the face to millions of Americans who are dealing with debilitating, but treatable, illnesses. This comment was demeaning and insulting, and this type of negative labeling is the exact reason that people who need mental health treatment do not seek it. I am not surprised that Mr. Moore would make such a slanderous remark, but I am surprised and disappointed that The Goshen News would print it.
— Ron Chupp