Letters: Wyatt Earp would not approve of loose gun laws
Re: ‘Use the laws on the books before making new ones’ (Metro, Sept. 27-29)
Letter writer John Stasner leaves out a key part of the Second Amendment. The Amendment refers to a well-regulated militia having the right to bear arms. This is clear, but the groups fighting any gun regulation ignore this provision. [Legendary Tombstone, Ariz., sheriff] Wyatt Earp would be shocked that there are groups advocating no restriction on guns. Guns were not tolerated in Tombstone. It is no accident that states with more restrictive gun laws have a lower murder rate.
Alan Podhaizer, via email
Both of these letters spoke in terms of the foolishness of gun control. Yes, we have laws, but they differ from state to state. Some have strong laws, but take a state like Virginia: Too many guns legally purchased in Virginia wind up in the hands of criminals in the streets of New York. The U.S. needs unified and intelligent process to controls guns. The second letter is just an absurdity because cars have a purpose other than killing people and there are laws on the books to try and stop people from driving while under the influence. Guns, on the other hand, have no purpose than to kill or harm. I support the right to protect your family and yourself. I do not support the right of criminals or mentally disturbed people to own and operate a gun.
Marion Lane, via email