Letters to the Editor: Teens fought in 1776. That’s no reason to let youths have assault rifles today

AR-15-style rifles are displayed for sale on a table.
AR-15-style rifles are displayed for sale at the Crossroads of the West Guns Show in Costa Mesa on June 5, 2021.
(Patrick T. Fallon / AFP/Getty Images)
Share via

To the editor: I am appalled that a federal appellate Judge, a Trump appointee, would annul a law in California prohibiting the sale of semiautomatic rifles to individuals under 21 years old. Such rifles were used in the mass murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida.

The killer at Sandy Hook was 20, and in the high school student killings, the suspect was 19 years old.

The judge’s reference to the heroic efforts of young Americans during the Revolutionary War is contrived and meaningless. It is not applicable to our military needs today.


The judge also fails to understand that the firearms used in the Revolutionary War were single-shot muskets, which took most soldiers about 20 seconds to load. In contrast, a young person can shoot more than one round per second using an AR-15.

How many first-graders could have been saved at Sandy Hook if the shooter had a musket instead of an AR-15-style assault rifle? How many high schoolers in Florida would be alive if the shooter also wasn’t using an AR-15-style weapon?

The judge’s misuse of history overlooked the advances in rifle technology and how lethal such guns have become the weapons of choice for mass murderers.

Larry Naritomi, Monterey Park


To the editor: Evidently the judge making the ruling about gun purchases in California is unable to read the 2nd Amendment, which begins with the phrase, “a well-regulated militia.”

Did he bother to explain how a person under 21 (or over 21) in this day and age constitutes a well-regulated militia?


In revolutionary times, many combatants might have been part of a militia. But today, most gun owners using the 2nd Amendment for their rights, sadly, don’t even know how it is written. Obviously this judge doesn’t either.

Anne Wimberley-Robinson, Oceanside


To the editor: This is great news!

My 4-year-old granddaughter wants her driver‘s license. How much easier for all of us would it be if she could just drive herself to preschool.

Now that a Trump-appointed federal appeals court judge thinks it is just ducky to let an immature person buy a deadly weapon, my granddaughter ought to have the right to drive one.

Sara R. Nichols, Los Angeles