By

I'm not sure you will ever understand. Your culture is very, very different from that in the United States. I imagine you get most of your information about the US from the news. While there is nothing unusual about that, and is as it should be, consider that the large, corporate news organizations based in the US are united in a common effort to report only some of the news. Not all of it. The major networks and papers, including the New York Times, makes no secret of the fact they are anti-gun. Perhaps that is why they do not report that armed Americans use firearms over two million times a year to stop crimes, most often without a shot being fired? An armed citizen, saving a life, or stopping a serious crime is a local story. When a drugged up kid (Ritalin) steals a gun and shoots up his peers, that is world wide news. When a repeatedly convicted felon, who has been released back into society, again, steals and uses a gun to commit murder or some other crime, it is somehow the fault of honest citizens and the NRA? Somehow the gun, and not the criminal, is to blame? Does that honestly make sense to you?

Maybe that is why they do not report the latest government findings that accidental gun death and injury is at an all time low, despite increased gun ownership. That is ALL TIME low, since they began keeping score, in 1903.

The news claims that children have unlimited access to guns. That is a lie. Before 1968, anyone with enough money, could buy a gun with few restrictions. I personally bought a .22 rifle when I was 12 years old. I joined a junior rifle club, and never entertained the thought of using it in a destructive or harmful manner. With the laws in place since 1968, there are many restrictions, not all of which I argue with, about gun ownership, but I can assure you that guns are NOT easier to obtain than they once were.

Those who wish to withhold responsibility from criminal actions, must blame the guns. To not blame guns would be to admit their social engineering and social experimentation is not working. They would have to admit their failure, which is a difficult thing to do. When a depressed teenager, who is constantly fed a steady diet of violent music, videos, games, and nightly television, goes on a rampage, blame the gun. When a kid who is fed mood altering drugs, such as Ritalin, by parents, teachers and psychologists who want to mold a new child, because they are not happy with the one they got, let's blame the gun.

When society tells them that rules don't apply to a few "special" people, such as those who hold high public office, or that you can get a lawyer and get away with it, blame the guns. When kids are instructed in school that results don't matter, as long as they can "nurture their self esteem," let's blame the guns. When kids are taught in government schools, that parents can not run their lives, and if punished by them, they should call the police, it is no wonder why we see such behavior in our kids.

When a "loser" kid, who is picked on and ridiculed, sees other such kids become media stars, who smile and wave at the cameras, that is thought of as a really cool way to get noticed. Since this most recent shooting in Santee, California, the number of copy-cat incidents and threats, has sky rocketed around the country. Let's blame the guns.

To those who wish to take away the rights of law abiding citizens, because of the acts of a few unbalanced people, consider the following. If it were to be shown that media exposure to such events causes copy-cat behavior, would you be willing to do away with the First Amendment right of freedom of speech? If a story, such as Columbine is still making headlines two years later, is that going too far with freedom of speech?

When a driver of a car at a S. California college intentionally drives into a crowd of people, and claims to be the "angel of death," why is it not reported widely and the car blamed? When another man drives his car into a day care facility, and claims he wanted to kill as many kids as possible, do we not hear a cry for immediate banning of cars? Why do we not hear a demand for licensing and registration of drivers and cars? Oh, yeah. I forgot, we've had that for decades. I guess licensing and registration of cars won't prevent some people from using cars in an illegal manner. Same thing with guns.

You ask about "the free market of firearms." I can assure you there is not an uncontrolled market of guns. Each and every gun purchased legally, has to be approved by the FBI. That's right. When a person passes the so-called "instant background check," the FBI certifies that person is a law abiding person with no criminal history. They say he is an upstanding member of society and he, or she, may own a gun. Of course, there is no way to control the black market in guns. Each and every one of those transactions is in and of itself, a federal felony, and no new laws will ever stop that. We have many, many laws concerning illegal drugs. Do those laws prevent drug use and trafficking?

If you wish to learn more of the truth, please visit;

http://www.cato.org//dailys/05-13-00.html 

http://www.guncite.com 

http://guntruths.com/ 

http://www.killology.com/ 

http://www.nraila.org/ 

http://www.jpfo.org/index.htm 

....and there are many more if you wish.

Yours truly,

Ron Willis

Gresham, Oregon USA

BACK