Blame military for destructive guns
With the ever increasing disturbing stories of people harming people with semi-automatic assault weapons or high capacity magazine weapons, and even the ability to obtain fully automatic weapons from illegal gun sales, drug cartels or the black market, where do we settle blame?
You have the NRA blaming irresponsible individuals and screaming about the right to bear arms. This right is stipulated in the Constitution, a piece of historical paperwork in which our forefathers were thinking of single shot lead balls used for hunting and to have in case a call to arms is needed to repel foreign invaders. They had no idea of what was to come.
I have nothing against hunting, which is done with bow, crossbow, black powder, shotgun and slug during different parts of the season. I have no problem with handguns for home protection as long as it is a 5-6 shot cylinder, .38/.44 caliber. Glock handguns should not be available to the public because these are magazine type handguns. The Glock 17 is so-named because the magazine holds 17 rounds. If you cannot defend your home with a 5-6 round revolver then 17 rounds will not make any difference and you probably should not have a handgun.
The actual blame has not been placed on the real culprit, and that is the military, and not just the U.S. military but all militaries. It is the military that subcontracts to weapons manufacturers with the requirement that they make better firearms for our troops to kill their troops.
Where would the world be without the M1, the Tommy gun, the AK47, the M16? Probably better off. The military is always looking for better ways to annihilate one another because the next war, the next conflict, is always just around the corner.
SCOTT R. THERRIEN
TALK TO US
If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom.