To the editor:
The NRA is against background checks and bans on assault weapons and large clips because “they won’t prevent all shootings.”
Shall we ban the laws against murder since they haven’t stopped all murders?
No one makes this claim. Furthermore, instead of making it easier to shoot people, we should be making it more difficult. Yes, background checks or bans on assault weapons and large clips won’t prevent all shootings, but they might prevent some or at least reduce the number of people wounded or killed.
The NRA claims it’s “not a gun problem” but “a mental instability problem.”
Should we have no traffic laws, regulations, or yearly registrations for our vehicles? Are bad drivers the only problem? No. Clearly no “mental instability” programs wi]l catch all potential shooters. But they may indeed stop some.
Most mass shooters want to create havoc and terror Some seem motivated by hopelessness, revenge, and maybe a desire for recognition. Others kill and spread fear to advance a movement or a belief. Still others exhibit all or mixed combinations of these elements. The randomness of mass shootings creates a social terror. The more fearful we are the more agitated and distrustful we become. Such fear also creates greater gun sales — as, most dangerously, violence and guns become answers for our fears.
The NRA’s answer for mass shootings is for millions to own and carry guns.
Simply having a gun implies a will to use it. With more guns close at hand, impulsive gun crimes (and planned ones?) are likely to increase. Finally, more gun crimes means even greater public fear and, yes, greater gun sales.
The NRA cares little about America’s high gun-crime rates. We know this because the NRA has consistently exploited fear for profit– and they haven’t supported the sensible regulations suggested above.
Kernan Claflin
Hancock