March 20, 2013

Letters to the editor
Debate continues over gun-data shield

(Continued from page 1)

click image to enlarge

Spectators watch from the hallway last week in Augusta at a public hearing on a bill that would make permanent a ban on releasing the names of Mainers with concealed-weapons permits.

2013 Kennebec Journal File Photo /Joe Phelan

It is time to not frequent those companies that put disparaging words out about the more than 99 percent of gun owners who are law-abiding and trustworthy.

Those who hold concealed-weapons permit holder status have been vetted well and do not deserve the implication that they are lawbreakers. It has to stop! And it will if we all act.

George A. Fogg

North Yarmouth

 

Second Amendment backer opponent of assault rifles

 

While I support the Second Amendment, I would like someone to tell me why anyone needs an assault rifle or a gun with more than 10 rounds to protect oneself from an intruder – or for any other reason.

Walt Stephenson

Falmouth

Critics of gun control voice paranoid views on the future

 

I have become somewhat alarmed when reading recent letters to the editor in your paper.

The people who have written in support of the Second Amendment and stopping gun-control discussions are exhibiting the reason we need to have this discussion along with providing access to and improving mental health care.

The paranoid tone of these letters and their scenarios of "defending ourselves" against the government and impending conversion of the United States into some Third World dictatorship is the very reason we need to limit what the average citizen is allowed to "bear" in regard to arms.

I think we have come a long way from the period when this document was drafted and the circumstances that inspired it. Limits need to be set regarding weapons other than muskets.

Should the average citizen be allowed to have an M60 machine gun? Hand grenades? No. Laws are in place to prevent the average citizen from possessing these weapons. Are these laws in violation of the "right to bear arms"? Or are they just common sense?

I have served in the Army and have a gun safe at home with several rifles and shotguns that I use for hunting. The government does not want to take these from me, regardless of what the National Rifle Association constantly refers to as "the slippery slope." In what paranoid scenario is the National Guard coming for your family and you are holding them back with your 30-round clips and your Bushmaster?

Your defense against the government is the vote. It's not a perfect system, but it prevents the minority from imposing its will on the majority with fear tactics and paranoid delusions.

As dysfunctional as Washington is, they are not plotting enslavement of the American people, despite what the NRA, Fox News or Rush Limbaugh reports.

John Glenn

Portland

 

Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form

Send question/comment to the editors




Further Discussion

Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.

Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
  • Type of computer or mobile device your are using
  • Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)