I don’t understand why every time we have a mass murder committed with a military-style weapon, reasonable people, including law-abiding, responsible gun owners, can’t have a conversation about why people need to have military assault weapons with 100-round clips.

While not a hunter, I support the right of hunters to shoot and eat wild game. I also support people being able to have legal, licensed handguns for protection.

As I said, I support hunters, but I’m guessing you won’t be getting in a firefight with a deer, moose or bear where you need an automatic weapon with a military-style 100-round clip.

A majority of National Rifle Association members polled support reasonable regulation of assault weapons and high-capacity clips. The NRA says mass murderers will find a way no matter what we do.

The killer in Colorado murdered and wounded so many because he did not have to stop and reload. Could he have killed 12 people with a buck knife or pistol?

A 10- to 15-round clip should be plenty of bullets for hunting or self-protection. If you can’t hit something with 10 bullets, perhaps gun ownership isn’t in your future.

And for those folks who think the government wants to come take their guns: News flash: We have the best-equipped, most professional and most capable military in the world, with state-of-the-art helicopter gunships, armored vehicles, et cetera. If the government really wanted to take your guns, an assault rifle wouldn’t do you much good.

Responsible gun ownership is a fine American tradition, but does easy access to assault weapons and high-capacity clips designed to kill as many people as possible in a short time have to be?

George Harlan

Old Orchard Beach

The Second Amendment to our Constitution reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The National Rifle Association has interpreted this amendment to be the right of every citizen to keep and bear a weapon whenever, wherever and however he pleases and gives him license to fire upon and kill a fellow human being if in his sole judgment he feels threatened. They disregard the “well regulated Militia” stipulation.

A well-regulated militia served our country well during the American Revolution. Fortunately, we have a modern counterpart: our law enforcement officials.

NRA members have an undeniable right to rifles appropriate for the pursuit of traditional sporting activities. They should leave the security of the population to our “well regulated Militia” instead of advocating a vigilante call to arms.

I would suggest the NRA might find a better use for the millions of dollars they spend annually lobbying our elected officials and campaigning against political candidates who have the courage to challenge their rejection of reasonable compromises on gun controls.

For example, these funds invested in employing additional well-trained police officers at state and local levels sufficient for the protection of all law-abiding citizens would be of benefit to everyone.

Automatic, semi-automatic weapons, etc., must once again be declared illegal by Congress and only made available to our “well regulated Militia.”

Until the NRA adopts a policy of not only protecting the “rights” of its members but also recognizes the “rights” of the general public and acknowledges the lives of innocent victims are equally important as the constitutional rights of their members to “keep and bear arms,” we can expect frequent repetitions of the horrifying Colorado mass killings.

Sam Kamin

Cumberland

In light of the recent events in Aurora, Colo., I offer a modest proposal for those individuals opposed to a reinstatement of the ban on assault weaponry: Spend less time indulging your erotic fantasies about defending the rest of us from communist tyranny and more time volunteering in a soup kitchen, blood bank, animal shelter, hospital, nursing home, etc. 

You might just discover America is not such a threatening place after all.  

Philip Davis

Gorham

Around 1:30 on Friday afternoon (July 20), I received a prerecorded message from the National Rifle Association encouraging my support of the right to bear arms.

The timing, as well as the message content, struck me as a tad odd. Clearly this appeal is sitting on ice somewhere waiting for immediate use whenever some whack-job goes on still another senseless rampage. I hope their robocall list included the loved ones of all 70 of those poor souls out in Colorado.

Unfortunately, by hiding behind an anonymous canned message, they avoid having to listen to a little common sense. Oh well, sticks and stones will break some bones, but guns can only kill you. How to go, NRA: “Stick to your guns.” It’s only “sporting”?

Stacy Stevens

Yarmouth

Senators’ votes against Disclose Act disappointing

On July 16, the Disclose Act (short for “Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections”) failed to make cloture, which would have allowed the Senate to take up the campaign finance bill. I am disappointed that two of the votes that stopped it came from our Maine senators.

The act would have required groups to disclose all expenditures of $10,000 or more on election-related communications, as well as the names of contributors who gave $10,000 or more to fund such efforts.

The people of this country have a right to know who is spending large amounts of money to influence elections, and this bill would simply make that information available.

In election years, I look forward to educational debate waged by candidates, not secret negative political attack ads that may or may not be true. Our leaders must move forward with campaign finance reforms that put voters in the driver’s seat of democracy and shine sunlight on shadowy interest groups looking to influence our elections and government.

Miriam Congdon

Scarborough

Reader thanks Maine DOT for its prompt response

The governor has commented that all state workers and middle managers are “corrupt” and implied they were not doing their jobs. My recent experience with the Department of Transportation proves how utterly false this statement is.

I commute to and from work via the Fore River Parkway and Commercial Street. With the opening of the new Veterans Memorial Bridge, there was a major change in the traffic pattern for drivers heading west.

Unfortunately, the signage, lights and arrows painted on the road were not clear enough to convey the lane changes to drivers, thus creating a very dangerous situation: three cars trying to drive straight into two lanes.

Three times in one week I was almost sideswiped as I became the car in the middle with my access to the right-hand lane blocked by a driver going straight, not turning right, as required in the changed pattern.

On July 12, I sent an email to the DOT telling them of my concern. Within 30 minutes of sending the message, I had a phone call from a DOT manager assuring me that my concern was serious and would be addressed promptly. He wasn’t kidding! As I was driving home that evening, I saw a full painting crew out working on the road.

Observing the changes, it is very clear that they are significant and will go far to ensure driver safety and decrease the potential for accidents at this very busy thoroughfare.

My thanks to the Maine DOT for listening to a citizen’s concerns, responding professionally and taking prompt corrective action. This Mainer believes that employees of the DOT are doing their jobs in an exemplary fashion. I appreciate their dedication to the safety of the residents of the state and want to thank them publicly.

Leslie Nicoll

Westbrook