Handgun Licensing Won’t Stop Criminals

* Re “Senate Panel OKs Licensing, Tests for Handgun Buyers,” April 18: I think your paper ought to consider a call to license legislators. State Sen. Jack Scott (D-Altadena) says that mandatory fingerprinting would deter criminals from applying. I think legislators should be tested to see if they have skills in logic and causality. His presumption is that, without this provision, criminals might consider applying for a handgun license.

I respect his grief for the loss of his son, but it does not give him the right to propose anything he wants. The law must still be good. How about enforcing the current laws and putting the criminals away? That would prevent them from using guns.

DAVID M. MIRANDA

Covina

*

* So now the few thousand new gun buyers (assuming there are that many, considering what they have to go through) may have to be licensed. Aside from more money in the state’s coffers, I don’t read what this is supposed to accomplish. Anyway, considering that there are millions of existing gun owners who are not required (at least for the time being) to be licensed and realizing that criminals don’t buy their guns that way, this law ought to put a real dent in the gun death and crime statistics. Incredible!

JOHN WAUGEN

Anaheim

*

* As a mother who has lost her only, 17-year-old child to gun violence, I applaud Scott for authoring the handgun safety licensing bill, the committee for approving it with a vote of 4 to 1 and the gun control advocates: members of Women Against Gun Violence, the Million Mom March, Handgun Control and others who are working extremely hard for common-sense gun laws. Scott’s SB 52 asks only that gun purchasers be responsible and be held accountable. It does not get any simpler than this!

CAROLANN TAYLOR

Inglewood