The Politics Behind the Guns Debate

Letters from The New York Times,

January 27th 2013

As a Vietnam veteran, an owner of both a rifle and a pistol, and a not-so-successful sheep hunter, I am one of the millions of Americans with guns as part of our lives. I am also a father. Because I am all of the above I am profoundly thankful that President Obama has challenged us to live within both our rights and responsibilities to save the lives of innocent victims of gun violence.

The horror of Newtown has shocked us into the realization that we must change. The families and friends of the victims of Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tucson and Aurora might ask why did it take so long. I don’t know the answer. And we will never know how many lives will be saved if we do act. All we know is the shame we must share if we don’t act.

As a former elected official, I have seen the power of people to create change despite the opposition and clout of well-connected and well-financed organizations and lobbyists. So I proudly join all of the veterans, gun owners and hunters who understand and value the rights and responsibilities that come with gun ownership and have the backbone to state their case.

Banning assault weapons, restricting ammunition magazines and requiring background checks on all sales are a start. It will not really change our lives as gun owners, but it may change the life of one innocent child by saving it.

TONY KNOWLES
Anchorage, Jan. 19, 2013

The writer was governor of Alaska from 1994 to 2002.

To the Editor:

Re “Democrats in Senate Confront Doubts at Home on Gun Laws” (front page, Jan. 24):

Some Democrats, especially in rural states, fear repercussions at the voting booth if they support legislation limiting any level of gun control. Those proposed limits include restrictions on assault weapons and large ammunition clips and additional screening of prospective gun buyers.

Senators in states that manufacture weapons also fear negative economic consequences. They are even afraid to explain to their constituents that proposed legislation would not take away Second Amendment rights to own an arsenal of popular weapons.

Perhaps I am completely naïve about politics, but this article did not even mention the possibility that one of our elected representatives might vote his or her conscience on this issue. It seems clear that at least some of our representatives believe that our current lack of gun limitations is unconscionable, but evidently less important than re-election.

The National Rifle Association mocks common sense, ginning up false arguments to appease its base and stay in business. Do our representatives in Washington act any differently?

JOHN VASI
Santa Barbara, Calif., Jan. 24, 2013

To the Editor:

Your article quotes Charlie Houck, a West Virginia banker, as saying, “We give up our rights one piece at a time.” Exactly right, sir.

Yesterday morning my wife received a phone call — the local elementary school attended by my two little girls, ages 8 and 6, was locked down. My daughters spent their morning under their desks, terrified; I won’t describe my own or my wife’s state of mind.

Later in the day dozens of guns were removed from a house across the street from the school by local and federal law enforcement agents. Yes, Mr. Houck, our rights are being taken away, including the right to live, unafraid, in a country that values the lives of children more than it values firearms.

GEORGE OVITT
Albuquerque, Jan. 24, 2013