Gun laws won’t prevent violence

Brian Emil, Las Vegas

Saturday, Jan. 26, 2013 | 2 a.m.

In response to James Witherspoon’s letter, “Go ahead, compare guns with vehicles”:

Let’s have a realistic comparison between the two. If I purchase a vehicle but never drive it on a public roadway, I am not required to register or even keep insurance on it. I must pay taxes and sign a declaration. If I use it only on private property, such as a ranch, it’s registered differently and doesn’t need insurance. Only vehicles operated on a public roadway require registration, insurance and a licensed operator.

If guns were treated the same, as long as I never carry my weapons off my property, I would be able to possess the largest guns I could legally purchase, including military weapons.

Witherspoon’s letter proved one argument of the National Rifle Association: It’s illegal to drive a vehicle on a public roadway without a license, registration or insurance, yet many do this daily. If laws won’t stop some people from breaking them regarding cars, what makes anyone think it will work for guns?

To have safer streets, we must increase punishment for criminals and take them off the street.

After the Virginia Tech shooting, we should have kept guns away from the mentally disturbed, except many blamed the tool for the crime. When a drunk driver kills four or six, will you blame Ford?

Change the laws so mental health professionals can add people to the FBI database, along with a penalty if they misuse it. Make it law that every gun be locked when not in use to help prevent theft of guns by criminals.

We shouldn’t unduly restrict constitutional rights for law-abiding citizens. I’m positive more gun laws won’t cure mental illness.