Connect With Us on Twitter
For Op-Ed, follow @nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow @andyrNYT.
Re "What Gun Lovers Think," by Joe Nocera (column, April 7):
As someone who investigates gun trafficking for a living, I found Mr. Nocera's conversation with a self-described liberal gun owner, Dan Baum, to be rather refreshing. That said, I must take issue with one of Mr. Baum's points.
Mr. Baum says that he supports universal background checks, but that gun owners do not want the sales to be documented, as this would result in a national registry of firearms. I would ask Mr. Baum how law enforcement can enforce the laws if we can't even trace recovered guns back to the last lawful owner. How can we effectively investigate trafficking of guns when we can only identify the first retail buyer?
Taking into account this fear of a national registry, I wonder how Mr. Baum and other gun owners would feel about requiring each state to maintain its own database of gun transactions? This mandate could include a provision that explicitly forbids the states from participating in a wholesale data dump to the federal government that could be used for the confiscation scenario that many gun owners fear.
We have such a database in Pennsylvania to track records of gun sales, including secondary sales of handguns, and it may only be used by law enforcement in connection with legitimate investigations. It is an invaluable tool. Can you and other gun owners meet us halfway on this, Mr. Baum?
JOSEPH L. BIELEVICZ
Pittsburgh, April 7, 2013
The writer is a detective with the Firearms Tracking Unit of the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police.
To the Editor:
Dan Baum declared there was a "cold logic" in the argument articulated by the National Rifle Association's executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, that "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
What is ignored by those who buy that N.R.A. "logic" is what Mr. Baum himself identified in the next part of his answer to Mr. Nocera. He said, "It's the reason we have armed guards in airports and shopping malls."
We can't dismiss the importance of the uniform. A bunch of theatergoers carrying concealed weapons while they watch a movie would not be a deterrent to a would-be assassin and might lead to untold mayhem should a gunman start firing, as happened in the Colorado theater. But a uniformed armed guard at the door or a police patrol in the area would likely provide a deterrent before any shots were fired. That, after all, is why we have police forces.
PETER MARTIN
San Diego, April 7, 2013
To the Editor:
I began "What Gun Lovers Think" with high hopes for learning more about "gun guys," as Dan Baum calls them. Instead I learned only that a liberal like Mr. Baum can trot out the same old arguments: gun control is impossible and criminals won't pay attention anyway.
The one new thing I learned is that liberal "rhetoric" is to blame for driving the gun guys into a "defensive crouch." So now just talking about gun control makes us all "less safe."
Who knew these gun guys were so delicate? Thirty thousand gun deaths in America a year don't faze them, but a few harsh words from the "Upper West Side of Manhattan" put them in a defensive crouch. Presumably with guns drawn.
RYAN F. HOLZNAGEL
Somerville, Mass., April 7, 2013
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Letters: A Chat With a Liberal Gun Enthusiast
Dengan url
http://opinimasyarakota.blogspot.com/2013/04/letters-chat-with-liberal-gun-enthusiast.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Letters: A Chat With a Liberal Gun Enthusiast
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Letters: A Chat With a Liberal Gun Enthusiast
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar