Crime Bill and Gun Control

Re “Weary Senate OKs Crime Bill After a GOP Challenge Fails,” Aug. 26:

I am so thrilled that the crime bill passed (at last!) and so angry with those who tried to derail it. Some congressmen do not seem to understand or care what it is like to live in an urban area.

As a fifth-grade teacher at an elementary school in a federal housing project in Downtown Los Angeles, I have heard my students for years ask why our government can’t do something about the drugs, gangs and guns. They couldn’t understand who could be against the Brady bill either. They will be relieved that this crime bill passed.

Also, those Republicans who spoke of “pork” should live in a housing project for one week to talk to the people and see what it is like to live there. We need to give these young people something positive to say yes to, not something negative like gangs and drugs. Prevention is as important as punishment.

Finally, a word in support of President Clinton. His message is reaching my students. For years I have had my students write about why they are proud to live in the U.S. The usual answers are freedom, good schools and amusement parks. But in April a number of my students (mainly boys) wrote they were proud “to have a President who cares about everybody” or “who wants to help us.” President Clinton is giving these young Americans hope.

JEANNETTE JONES, Pasadena

*

As the father of an “endangered” 17-year-old son, I applaud Helen Schooler’s (letter, Aug. 27) insightful suggestion that we duplicate the outstanding successes of Mothers Against Drunk Driving by forming parent-driven organizations nationwide to continue the legislative assault against indiscriminate ownership of weapons of all kinds.

However, let’s call it “Parents Against Weapons” (fathers and mothers) and the membership will double from conception. P.S. What about a “Ban the Bullets” ballot initiative for assault weapons?

BOB THOMAS, Los Angeles

*

I have a bone to pick with Schooler’s comment that there ought to be an organization like MADD called Mothers Against Weapons. It’s hardly the same thing: MADD hasn’t tried to ban cars. Last time I checked, guns have legitimate uses: Self-defense is one of them.

ROBERT McMILLIN, Garden Grove

*

I’m writing in response to Susan Estrich’s article (Opinion, Aug. 28). She, the President and the media continue to portray the National Rifle Assn. as some kind of special interest group made up of a group of millionaires. They couldn’t be further from the truth. The NRA is made up of over 3.5 million hard-working Americans who believe the Bill of Rights should not be infringed upon.

The funds that Estrich says the NRA receives are from meager donations, usually in the $25 to $50 range, that we hard-working Americans send in so that our voice can be heard.

The NRA is made up of Americans in the truest form, unlike those that are ready to give up their freedoms for a little safety. Benjamin Franklin said, “Those that give up liberty for a little safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.”

KIRK E. HOUSER, Caliente

*

A true Republican--it’s OK to be shot with an assault weapon and not have medical insurance to cover the wound.

DAVID THORESEN, Glendale