Responds to Jan. 24 letter on gun control

To the Editor:

In response to a letter in the Jan. 24, 2013 edition of the Fairfield Sun entitled, “Obama’s Gun Control Proposals Are Common Sense,” I feel the need to offer another common sense stand on the subject in the interest of fair play and reality.

The author believes that the gun control actions proposed by Mr. Obama are a common sense solution to mass gun murders and that may or may not be so. However, he also presents a clear belief that any law-abiding citizen who legally owns a gun to protect themselves, their families and their homes has the audacity to believe that “law-abiding citizens are the ones who would be punished” by excessive gun control laws.

Further, the author goes on to call such law-abiding citizens whiners for having the temerity to stand up for their constitutional right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The same Constitution, which gives us that right also gives the author his right to make such misguided statements. Would he whine if his right to free speech were restricted?

I submit that the restriction of assault weapons is a common sense idea, but standing up for one’s constitutional rights is just as valid a concept. To show disdain for people who ,are not criminals and who have not nor would not, kill anyone is more unacceptable than allowing law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to defend themselves. These people don’t want their right to own a gun infringed so they can commit murders; they want their rights upheld so that they can defend themselves from those who do.

Law-abiding citizens are not the problem. By limiting our ability to defend ourselves, you embolden criminals to commit crimes because they know they will not face resistance. That is the meaning of “Law-abiding citizens are the ones who would be punished.” Sounds like a common sense idea to me.

The author finishes with the mind-boggling statement that “up until Dec. 14, 2012, the perpetrator of the Newtown massacre, and the person who enabled him to secure his weapons of mass murder, were both law-abiding citizens. Do you get it now?” What the author doesn’t get is that the shooter was mentally ill and by killing 26 people, was clearly not law-abiding or rational. Oh, and by the way, his law-abiding mother was killed “enabling” him to get his weapons, which she owned legally.

Law-abiding citizens didn’t kill those children and they never would. And let’s pray that the author never needs a law-abiding, legally-armed citizen to step in to save him from a criminal.

Despite political affiliations, we can all agree that the events of Newtown were horrific and should never happen again. As such, assault weapons should be dealt with, but so should mental health issues and Hollywood’s glorification of guns and violence. Those are the real problems. Vilifying and punishing those who own guns legally is not the “common sense” solution.


Joe Sabella


About author

By participating in the comments section of this site you are agreeing to our Privacy Policy and User Agreement

© HAN Network. All rights reserved. Fairfield Sun, 1000 Bridgeport Avenue, Shelton, CT 06484

Designed by WPSHOWER

Powered by WordPress