Readers write



Great Britain a model for gun laws and campaign limits

Recently there has been a spate of articles and letters suggesting the U.S. mimic European practices and laws.

Gun laws come to mind. No other country has the 2nd amendment. Personal defense weapons were not high-powered, multi-round, rapid-fire killing machines when our Constitution was conceived. I support banning them for individuals, universal background checks, red flag laws and age limits.

If we are to mimic other countries, let’s look to Great Britain’s sensible time limits for candidates to campaign. That viewers have to be subjected to insufferable campaign ads from now to November is insulting.

By the time the election rolls around, burnout has occurred.


How can good come out of shootings when lawmakers won’t act?

While I appreciate the opinion column, “Trauma of shootings felt across society” (Insights, June 1), explaining how trauma can affect people in different ways, I was disheartened by his attempt to explain how good can come out of tragedy.

He said we should “channel the collective agony to encourage meaningful changes,” such as “making gun laws safer” and “calling on lawmakers to take real action.”

But when our lawmakers resist any kind of change, even commonsense changes like expanded background checks and red flag laws, it is hard to see any good coming out of the senseless killing of defenseless school children and their teachers.


Texas killer knew what gun he needed for mass killing

I read a letters headline June 1, after 21 people, 19 of them young children, were killed by an AR-15. The headline said, “Focus should be on Texas killer, not gun control.”

Well, that “Texas killer” was smart. Despite his difficult life and skipping school a lot, he was smart. He knew exactly what AR-15s were for. He bought two of them, plus rounds of ammunition and used one to slaughter 21 people.

Our elected leaders want to keep the door open to buying all guns because they don’t know what AR-15s are for, but he knew.