Import Ban on Assault Rifles

Re “Gun Ban: a Step for Life,” editorial, April 7: The Times is quick to praise an empty gesture from Bill Clinton. His new ban on semiautomatic rifle imports will have no effect on violent crime. You wrote that the NRA claims that “these guns are not the criminals’ weapon of choice.” It is, in fact, the government itself that makes this claim. The arms affected by this order are used in less than 1% of homicides.

These are guns that only look like military guns. This is all a matter of cosmetics. These guns are no more or less dangerous than any other gun. What matters is the hand that holds the gun. In the hands of a law-abiding citizen, any gun is safe. In the hands of a felon, no gun is safe. If Clinton really did care about reducing violent crime, he would be talking about keeping felons in prison and away from guns. This ban can only affect law-abiding citizens, not criminals.

STEVE BELL

Woodland Hills

*

Regardless of your position on guns, it is not good government to have the executive branch make laws. This is a function of the legislative branch after extensive debate. Although a very feel-good editorial, you do not present any evidence on the assertions that many of these guns will end up in the hands of criminals or children. Using your logic the executive branch should ban tobacco, automobiles, red meat, etc., because all of these in some way cause death.

Finally, please cite how many people were killed in these United States by these weapons last year. Without this statistic, your editorial does not hold water.

ROGER L. CLOUTIER

Redondo Beach

*

I have a great idea. Let’s pull all the guns in this country, the rifles, semiautomatics, automatics, manuals, etc., and put them in a great big vault that locks and that we can’t get anything out of for a year; let’s see what happens.

KADY LANE

Los Angeles