The following is a response to Jerry Kremer’s Inside Politics column titled “Baby Steps Are Not Enough,” which ran the week of Jan. 17-23.
I believe Mr. Kremer showed his true feelings about the 2nd amendment with use of Orwellian double speak that completely reverses his first statement. He states, “I am not an advocate of repealing the 2nd amendment that gives the citizens the ‘right to bear arms.’ I am too much of a realist to think that could happen.” So Mr. Kremer actually wants the abolishment of the 2nd amendment and he is frustrated that it won’t be able to be done. It is quite obvious that Mr. Kremer’s idea of modest changes to gun laws for a safer America is to strip away a part of the Bill of Rights and make all guns illegal. This is the same proposal that the bureaucrats at the United Nations make as they also work towards undermining our Constitution.
Congress has been correct to not get fervent in excessive gun suppression legislation because the last part of the 2nd amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. We could have a safer America by having more firearm training classes offered in high schools and promoting more small enterprises of gun ranges that will be good for the local economy and create jobs.
As for banning bump stocks—the newest focus of gun control activists—the ATF (The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms) a few years back considered the bump stock a part, not a weapon. California has some of the most stringent gun laws in the country, and still experienced mass shootings, namely the San Bernardino shooting in 2015, where 14 were killed. This incident was noticeably left out of incidents mentioned in Mr. Kremer’s piece. While it was an act of terrorism, a study from Mother Jones magazine done at that time, found that 82 percent of weapons involved in mass shootings over the last three decades have been bought legally. No gun laws can stop people intent on hurting others. I did sense that it was disconcerting to the writer that guns are such an effective way of killing, but man has always found ways to be efficient at doing that to each other, guns or no guns. Since most people own firearms for defensive means, instituting regulations on law-abiding citizens exercising a recognized right granted by the Constitution is not the answer. It is time to bring back a respect for morality, personal responsibility and focusing on the person who committed the crime rather than ban on civilian ownership of guns.
—Chris Wales
