Sensible Gun Control Needed

Re “Guns: State Issue for 2001,” editorial, Jan. 8: We heartily agree that the time is long overdue to enforce state gun laws and to extend them to the utmost. We support SB 52 for gun licensing. Being survivors of a victim killed with an unlawful gun, we speak from experience. With support from other sensible-thinking folk we may succeed in preventing others from experiencing the same tragedy as we did.

ART and BOBBIE PEYSER

Santa Monica

*

The Times’ endorsement of fining and/or jail time plus the subsequent criminalization of the tens of thousands of assault rifle owners who haven’t registered their evil-looking firearms is wrong. It was perfectly legal to buy, own, sell or will these things a little over a year ago. Your support for ever-more-stringent gun laws has ensured that poor women and men won’t be able to afford a handgun for protection.

Yours is an elitist policy that flies in the face of logic, national statistics, equal protection and a constitutional amendment read without bias. Followed to its natural conclusion, your policy allows firearms only in the hands of affluent/well-connected citizens, the government or criminals.

LESLIE WATKINS

Claremont

*

It is now, unfortunately, politically correct to bash gun owners. We are not those individuals who are the perpetrators of crime in this state. We are, however, those citizens who will for now obey the law and register the weapons that “look dangerous.” Of course, I am quite sure the gangbangers who shoot up neighborhoods, carjack and rob people have registered their weapons pursuant to the law. Gee, I now feel very safe.

CARSON LOWE

Redlands

*

I fail to see how any of the new gun laws make anyone safer. In fact, logic tells us that, with the adoption of new laws, reducing supply effectively increases the price for guns on the black market. Earth to Times: Criminals do not follow laws. They break laws; that’s why they are criminals.

Even if 10,000 people registered their guns at $20, that translates to nearly $200,000 in revenue, which is not nearly enough to offset $750,000 of tax dollars disguised as marketing costs to promote the supposedly “clear” gun regulations.

Registration leads to confiscation. To think that the state should spend money to try and convict a citizen who was law-abiding on Dec. 31 because he failed to timely register a weapon (by Jan. 1) is insanity. Why doesn’t the state focus on prosecuting repeat felons with guns rather than generally law-abiding gun owners who may be uninformed on California’s weapons laws? Did you know that assault weapons are used in less than 10% (1% in some studies) of crimes? Oh, I forgot, the Legislature doesn’t care about facts.

MICHAEL “MYKE” C. ROST

Altadena

*

It is such a relief to read that The Times supports a reduction in the number of firearms in this state. We are in the throes of a national emergency because of the proliferation of weapons. In the name of reason, we must let lawmakers know that we are all afraid that there are too many guns in this country.

ELEANOR K. PELCYGER

Los Angeles