Wrong question being asked on weapons

You are asking the wrong question. You should be asking "Do you think these proposals will effectively reduce gun violence in America?"

There are problems just defining what we are trying to control. And what if magazines are reduced to seven rounds? How many rounds could someone fire if they could change magazines in 10 seconds and it takes the police 5 minutes to respond?

Human beings do not like to think there are things they cannot control so they are comforted by such efforts.

However consider: Gun violence, drug violence, domestic violence, workplace violence, racial violence.

The common denominator here is not guns.

The only way we will ever reduce violence in all of its guises is to focus our resources on:

Maximizing educational opportunities, teaching tolerance and self-control, encouraging the cultivation of spirituality, creating a vibrant economy with opportunity for everyone, addressing mental/emotional health issues

Time will prove these proposals are an exercise in intellectual dishonesty. The president asks me to "examine my conscience." I ask him to examine his logic.

Norman Brown

(Member of the NRA) Fremont

New gun regulations are common sense


Advertisement

I strongly agree with the president's proposed gun laws, if automatic weapons containing no more than a six-clip ammo magazines are outlawed. Guns are used for killing either animals or human beings. Guns used for hunting birds and game should be allowed. Who needs a 30-round clip automatic weapon to go hunting unless you are hunting humans.

The Second Amendment was put into the Constitution to protect the young United States from foreign nations such as England, the nation we defeated to gain our independence and establish a free new nation.

The Second Amendment was written into our Constitution at a time when there were no kooks running around shooting people for some bizarre reason. The only people who should be allowed to possess automatic, multiclip weapons are the armed forces and police forces.

The NRA's interpretation of the Second Amendment is completely wrong by saying any person can buy any type of weapon whether it be a single shot or automatic assault weapon.

The NRA should have programs that teach how to safely use firearms strictly for hunting animals and target practice, not shooting humans. The NRA has very radical ideas about firearm specifications and laws.

If the United States were threatened by a foreign nation, the NRA members with their automatic weapons could not defend our country. That's why we have the military to fight our enemies.

Robert V. Beaudreau

Fremont

More 'safety teams' are needed in schools

Hell no! What's needed is to train "safety teams" of school employees to respond to these emergencies.

In each of these incidents, the police have proved inept at prevention.

A single bullet by a school official could have stopped this nut, but the school is a "gun-free zone" except for criminals who don't obey laws.

The police come after the fact to pick up the dead and to write a report.

The temporary solution is to allow for the citizens to carry guns, concealed or otherwise.

The gun controllers talk about "assault rifle ban," but they're actually aiming at gradually banning all guns except, of course, for police and the military; that's the hypocrisy of progressives.

What's next? Banning all chemistry classes so nobody would make bombs?

Then, we have a hypocrite president -- who presides as Attorney General Eric Holder's "Fast and Furious" gun sales to Mexican cartels that resulted in the killing of unknown number of Mexicans and even a couple of Border Patrol agents -- shedding crocodile tears in Newtown.

This is also the same president who presides over executive assassinations by drones of entire families in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc.

Leo T. West

San Leandro

Obama proposals are wrong except for one

I do not favor the gun control proposals advanced by President Barack Obama because they are the first steps in banning all firearms ownership by law-abiding citizens and confiscating all firearms owned by law-abiding citizens, in violation of their Second Amendment individual right to keep and bear arms, as upheld by the Supreme Court.

There should be no banning and confiscating of military-style, semi-automatic rifles, non-military-style semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic shotguns or semi-automatic pistols.

There should be no banning or confiscating of clips with more than 10 rounds capacity because many standard semi-automatic pistol clips hold more than 10 rounds.

There should be no banning of "armor piercing" bullets because it would ban all centerfire rifle ammunition, which will penetrate a bullet resistant vest designed to stop handgun bullets.

The one proposal I would favor is extending background checks to gun shows and private sales. The federal government should step up the prosecution of straw buyers and gun traffickers using laws presently on the books.

There needs to be a total stop to the use of the term "gun violence" which implies that guns jump up and do something by themselves and a start to the use of the term "criminal violence" which puts the blame for gun misuse on the criminal.

David R. Russell

Berkeley

Skip the bravado, start a real conversation

I read the newspaper everyday and wonder what would indicate that we had a problem in this country with gun violence if the stories I read daily are not sufficient evidence.

Addressing the problem of gun violence is a complex, multifaceted endeavor.

I am bored to tears by the one-prong answer about defending the Second Amendment. If we can't move to a more meaningful discussion of our culture, it's relationship to gun violence, and the availability of guns, we are in deep trouble.

The ridiculous statement that one armed good guy is the solution to many armed bad guys smacks of an old John Wayne western.

Consider the potential for the armed school principal missing his mark, shooting an innocent person, killing the janitor who has tackled the shooter. Shall I go on? The solution is not adding classes in marksmanship to the education of teachers.

Let's stop relying on simplistic catchphrases to explain any of the multifaceted issues involved in this complex countrywide problem, and focus on the beginnings of a meaningful dialogue.

Linda Schaefer

Richmond

Oakland body count shows need for laws

Yes, I favor the gun control proposals made by President Obama. I just wish they had been stronger.

Why? There were more than 130 dead people in Oakland because of guns.

Mareth Ellis

Oakland