Thursday, Jan. 17, 2013 | 2:01 a.m.
Regarding Ronald Plamondon’s letter, “Guns protect us from government,” he expresses concern for “an entity” taking away his freedom by disarming citizens.
Most citizens don’t want to take away anyone’s right to bear arms. Of course, there are extremes on both sides of this issue. There are no laws that prevent every situation.
But, let’s regulate weapons to reduce people on the terrorist watch list from obtaining any. Federal laws should require registering guns with a database match of immigration, motor vehicle, criminal and mental records that may indicate a past or potential for violent behavior.
There is a need to prevent the legal sale of high-capacity rifles and guns with clips holding more than 10 shots. Also, we need to record the sales of bullets that exceed 200 rounds.
Job opportunities could be created as result of these regulations.
A “right to carry” allows people the privilege to bring a concealed weapon into public places, increasing the potential for its use not just prevent violence but also to cause it. Even trained law enforcement officers occasionally shoot the wrong person. Gun battles in a darkened theater with shots fired by those less trained could kill or injure more than the criminal.
What “entity” would try to take weapons away? The federal government’s increased regulation, as suggested above, would not prevent a law-abiding citizen from obtaining guns. An “entity” could not survive against the power of the United States armed forces or the outrage and actions of our citizenry.