Death of Deputy Yamamoto

In response to “The Death of a Brave Deputy,” editorial, April 2:

The criminal responsible for the death of Deputy Nelson Yamamoto was in this country illegally (thanks in part to the laxity of the INS), was wanted for murder in El Salvador, and undoubtedly did not obtain his handgun by purchasing it at the local sporting goods store and complying with the 15-day waiting period. Therefore, I fail to understand how additional laws restricting the possession of handguns by law-abiding citizens would have prevented this deputy’s shooting. There are over 20,000 laws regulating the purchase and use of firearms in this country and despite this imposing paper juggernaut criminals still manage to obtain weapons.

If “gun control” is so effective, why do Washington and New York City (which have the strictest firearms laws in the country, including virtual bans on handgun possession) have the highest crime rates? Conversely, why has Florida, which passed a law in 1987 making it easier for individuals without a criminal record to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon, not experienced any surge in violent crime but has instead noted a decrease?

The National Rifle Assn. is a staunch supporter of severe penalties for the use of a firearm in the commission of a crime, including the elimination of “plea bargaining” which ensures that a depressing majority of convicted criminals serve little, if any, prison time. To me, this approach makes much more sense than denying the law-abiding an extremely effective means of personal protection.

CARL J. ROSSI

Redlands