Letters to the Editor: Using NRA logic after the massacre in Cleveland, Texas

To the editor: I’m trying to channel the National Rifle Assn.’s belief that gun violence can be addressed by arming more people. How would that apply to the killing of five people in Cleveland, Texas?

The shooter was already armed, so the only place to add guns was in the victims’ hands. Then, they could have engaged in an honest American gunfight, which they would have won because they are the “good guys with a gun.”

So, five saved lives (the victims) at the expense of one killed (the bad guy), for a net gain of four.

Maybe the NRA has a point. The weak-minded and unpatriotic among us might think it would have been better if no one had had a gun (zero lives lost), but that would be perfection, and everyone knows the perfect is the enemy of the good.

And “good” means people occasionally dying, so long as we’re not the ones being killed.

Barry Carlton, El Cajon

..

To the editor: Authorities in Cleveland, Texas, said the alleged gunman frequently fired his AR-15 rifle in his front yard. Gunfire in the town is a common occurrence, we’re told.

It’s OK in Texas to fire weapons like that in your front yard? Bullets go up, out and down, and they can kill.

How can Texas keep saying it doesn’t need stricter gun laws? Makes you wonder when enough is enough.

Jo Wiliams, Long Beach

..

To the editor: In his column about the cliched, empty responses following the all-too-frequent mass shootings in our country, [LZ Granderson] mentions the depressing fact that the U.S. has more guns than people.

I, on the other hand, prefer to look on the bright side: At least we still have more hands than guns.

Joe Kevany, Mount Washington