To the editor: I’m attempting to channel the Nationwide Rifle Assn.’s perception that gun violence will be addressed by arming extra folks. How would that apply to the killing of 5 folks in Cleveland, Texas?
The shooter was already armed, so the one place so as to add weapons was within the victims’ arms. Then, they may have engaged in an sincere American gunfight, which they’d have received as a result of they’re the “good guys with a gun.”
So, 5 saved lives (the victims) on the expense of 1 killed (the dangerous man), for a internet achieve of 4.
Possibly the NRA has some extent. The weak-minded and unpatriotic amongst us may assume it will have been higher if nobody had had a gun (zero lives misplaced), however that may be perfection, and everybody is aware of the right is the enemy of the great.
And “good” means folks sometimes dying, as long as we’re not those being killed.
Barry Carlton, El Cajon
..
To the editor: Authorities in Cleveland, Texas, mentioned the alleged gunman ceaselessly fired his AR-15 rifle in his entrance yard. Gunfire within the city is a typical incidence, we’re instructed.
It’s OK in Texas to fireside weapons like that in your entrance yard? Bullets go up, out and down, and so they can kill.
How can Texas maintain saying it doesn’t want stricter gun legal guidelines? Makes you surprise when sufficient is sufficient.
Jo Wiliams, Lengthy Seashore
..
To the editor: In his column in regards to the cliched, empty responses following the all-too-frequent mass shootings in our nation, [LZ Granderson] mentions the miserable proven fact that the U.S. has extra weapons than folks.
I, alternatively, want to look on the intense facet: At the least we nonetheless have extra arms than weapons.
Joe Kevany, Mount Washington
