Get unlimited digital access to $0.99 for 4 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

There are some scary gun owners out there

There are some truly scary gun owners out there. Reader Jason Davis asks, "Why would anyone want to restict my right to defend myself and my family by limiting access to ammunition"? ("Limiting high-capacity ammunition magazines hinders self defense," Jan. 20.)

By way of example he cites two New York officers who fired 39 and 45 rounds at a suspect respectively who was "only" hit 14 times! Is it normal and rational to believe it takes 84 rounds on one person for self defense? And hitting someone 14 times is "only"? Do hunters shoot 84 rounds at prey and hit 14 times to bring them down?

And the point that most murders are not committed with semi/fully automatic rifles beside the point. The point is said rifles can cause mass casualities in under a minute.

For example, could a knife or a handgun have wounded scores and killed 12 in Aurora, Colo.? Or killed over 70 young people in Norway?

Oh but wait! The killers could have had a big bag of bombs they could have thrown far enough to not blow themselves up!

Gun "enthusiasts" would argue the solution is to arm everyone. As experts, what would they say are the odds for people with handguns against someone in body armor with a high capacity rifle? And how many people are dead before anyone can even react? Remember the firefighters who were shot and killed at the fire In New York state had a police escort who returned fire. But not before two firemen were dead.

Michelle Alston, Baltimore

  • Text NEWS to 70701 to get Baltimore Sun local news text alerts
  • Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
    Related Content
    • Hogan, guns and the attorneys general
      Hogan, guns and the attorneys general

      During the recent gubernatorial campaign, The Sun and several thoughtful citizens were perplexed about the discrepancy between the National Rifle Association's notorious A- rating for Larry Hogan and the candidate's repeated promise that he won't overturn Maryland's gun law if elected. In fact,...

    • Md. gun law is working [Letter]
      Md. gun law is working [Letter]

      Jack Mccauley's letter belittling the Firearms Safety Act fails to mention the most important parts of the new law — the requirement that handgun purchasers get a fingerprint-based license and the authority for the state police to regulate firearms dealers ("O'Malley, Brown are kidding...

    • Gun law doesn't make Marylanders safer [Letter]
      Gun law doesn't make Marylanders safer [Letter]

      Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown's recent commentary on Maryland's 2013 Firearms Safety Act is disingenuous and deceitful ("Brown: I will enforce gun safety law," Oct. 2).

    • A wasteful death by Uzi [Letter]

      Though I seriously doubt it, I wonder if a gun advocate or a member of National Rifle Association could explain to me why a 9-year-old girl needs weapons training ("An Uzi, a 9-year-old and American exceptionalism," Aug. 31). When I first read about the 9-year-old girl who had accidentally...

    • The city's problem isn't guns, it's gangs [Letter]
      The city's problem isn't guns, it's gangs [Letter]

      While I agree with letter writer Pat Ranney that Baltimore has a serious gun violence problem, she is incorrectly placing blame on an inanimate object. Guns don't pull the trigger, people do ("Baltimore's violence won't end until we stand up to the gun lobby," Aug. 14).

    • Judge's decision on Md. assault weapons ban makes no one safer [Letter]
      Judge's decision on Md. assault weapons ban makes no one safer [Letter]

      U.S. District Judge Catherine Blake's decision upholding Maryland's assault weapons ban isn't a victory for anyone ("A victory for public safety," Aug. 14).