Response to AWB Editorial

[Synergy]

My first time ever sending a response to a newspaper editorial/opinion.

Original Editorial

Sheriff's Department's Gifts for Guns program is helping make the streets safer.

Battling gangs should be a central priority in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department crime prevention strategy. Often, the majority of a community's violent crimes are gang-related.

That's why we agree with the sheriff's Gifts for Guns program started in 2005 in which people can turn in their guns for cash. While not a panacea for stopping gang violence, this will help remove some handguns and rifles ($100) and assault weapons ($200) from the street. One less gun in the hands of these thugs could mean one less drive-by shooting.

This year's program will get a boost from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in the form of $1 million to the county, part of a $9 million infusion statewide toward anti-gang efforts.

Speaking of assault weapons, there is more the country can do to rid these weapons from our streets than simply asking for a voluntary turn-in. That is, Congress must renew the ban on the sale of assault weapons that expired in 2004 and was not renewed by the Republican-led Congress, despite hints of support by then-President George W. Bush.

Five years later and the assault weapon has become the gun of choice for multiple homicides by desperate killers or even parolees bent on not returning to jail. In Oakland, parolee Lovelle Mixon, after shooting two police officers in cold blood during a traffic stop, then ran to an apartment where he stashed his AK-47. When two more SWAT officers came into the room, Mixon took advantage of the weapon's ultimate killing power to shoot through the closet and fatally wound two more police officers. The funeral for the four slain Oakland officers took place on Friday.

In Alabama earlier this month, Michael McLendon used an assault weapon, an AR-15, among other guns he had collected, to slaughter 10, including family members, neighbors and whoever else stood in his way.

While a renewed assault weapons ban probably would not have halted some of these killing rampages, a ban can be another tool for police and sheriff's deputies to possibly prevent some crimes and give street officers the upper hand when or if a gunbattle erupts.

Not only will a renewed assault weapons ban be a tool for fighting gangs in the United States, it may help stem the flow of these weapons into Mexico. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, at a press conference last month, said the president believes a renewed assault weapons ban could help Mexican authorities in their battle with local drug cartels.

More reason why President Barack Obama and the Congress should get busy on a renewal of the assault weapons ban.

But before Congress can act, many can turn in assault weapons and other firearms for cash to the Sheriff's Department. Their turned-in guns would be destroyed and melted down and the metal used to make other products. It's a hopeful kind of recycling.

In response to: Renew Assault Weapon Ban in your 3/28/2009 edition.

First off, In the mid-1980s, gun control groups invented the slang term “assault weapon” and applied it to certain semi-automatic firearms which, though designed for civilian use, look like modern fully-automatic assault rifles used by the military. Assault weapon is buzzword to cue emotion. An 1880’s black powder musket can assault someone just as easy a modern AK-47. If someone is murdered with a knife or baseball bat, we do not call it an assault knife or assault bat.

In 1994 President Clinton enacted an Assault Weapon Ban. It expired in 2004. One of the goals was to prohibit the manufacture, sale, and possession of specific makes and models of military-style semiautomatic firearms. Weapons and magazines manufactured prior to September 13, 1994, were exempt from the ban. The ban also had no effect on foreign-made “assault weapons,” such as AK-47s and Uzis, because their importation was banned in 1989.

The National Institute of Justice stated a key issue is the ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims. Crime reports and felon surveys showed that “assault weapons” were used in only 1-2 percent of violent crimes before the ban; crime victim surveys indicated the figure was 0.25 percent. In the 10 years before the ban, murders committed without guns outnumbered those with “assault weapons” by about 37-to-1. Also, most crimes committed with such guns could be committed with other guns not on the ban list, and some could be committed without guns. During the ban and post ban firearm sales have been on a steady incline. The ban has failed to accomplish its goal of decreasing crime since post ban the crime rate has been on a steady decline.

As mentioned in your editorial “…the assault weapon has become the gun of choice for multiple homicides by desperate killers or even parolees bent on not returning to jail. In Oakland, parolee Lovelle Mixon, after shooting two police officers in cold blood during a traffic stop, then ran to an apartment where he stashed his AK-47…”This brings up the point enforcing the laws we already have on the books. Lovelle Mixon is a previous felon and prohibited by federal law from gun ownership. If in fact he had a AK-47 it would have been banned in 1989, before the ‘94 AWB.

There are approximately 300 million privately owned firearms in the US. A new AWB will not stop crime, nor limit a criminal’s access to firearms. The truth is regardless of firearms being banned criminals do not follow the laws. Nor would they abide by a new AWB. The government needs to stop being hard on law abiding citizens who value their freedom granted in the Second Amendment and start being hard on criminals who commit crimes and break the laws we already have in place.

[m98]

Great reply......I don't know of ANY news station/news paper/news media that's Pro 2nd. All they want to do only make it worst and show the Sheeples all around this country that guns=bad and local news=good/ratings=good

[rc50cal]

Thanks for taking the time to respond. If you haven't already sent your response to them consider changing "who value their freedom granted in the Second Amendment" to "who value their freedom confirmed by the Second Amendment." If you already sent it in then no worries.

[Capt. Speirs]

BRAVO!

[kurac]

2 thumbs up