Gun Licensing and Public Safety

* I found the contrast between Sarah Brady’s and John Lott’s gun control columns (Aug. 23) to be interesting and quite illuminating. Whereas Brady throws hyperbole and platitudes at the reader (“Californians . . . could be welcoming pistol-packing tourists to Disneyland and Dodger games”), Lott actually presents facts. Brady warns ominously about the prospect of a Bush presidency, implying he will make our country more dangerous by limiting new gun control measures. But Lott discusses the actual measured effects of gun control laws and concealed-carry programs.

PETER BROUSSINOS

Hermosa Beach

*

* Lott’s article is dangerously and infuriatingly deceptive, a tiresome repetition of the gun lobby’s propaganda. It is based on the premise that the law-abiding citizen needs a gun to protect himself. I have lived in New York City and in Los Angeles and have never felt the need to protect myself with a gun. Does an easy availability of guns not facilitate and encourage the criminal and criminally inclined to obtain a gun?

ERIC MARX

Palm Desert

*

* Lott doesn’t mention the fact the Western nations with fewer guns also have fewer homicides. He cites the argument of the poor being priced out of gun ownership. It was only recently a Latino father tried to thwart an invasion in his home and died for it.

MITCHELL RABUCHIN

Lake Balboa