Letters to the Editor: Abuse victims get protection from gun violence. What about the rest of us?

Handguns for sale at a gun store in Carson in 2023
Handguns are displayed for sale at a gun store in Carson in 2023.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
Share via

To the editor: The U.S. Supreme Court decision denying domestic abusers the right to own guns is a welcome relief. It’s nice to know that some people are protected by the court’s decision.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can continue worrying about crazies with bump stocks every time we enter a school, mall, church or synagogue, music festival, museum or grocery store.

I’m sure there is some logic connecting these two decisions, but I’m scratching my head trying to figure it out.


Barbara Sobin Rosen, Fullerton


To the editor: I am waiting for someone to sue for the right to bring a loaded gun onto an airplane.

It must have been legal to bring a loaded firearm in a horse-drawn carriage in 1791, so why can’t we still have the right to bring a loaded gun with us when we board modern transportation?

Sue Guilford, Orange


To the editor: In her concurring opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote, “Despite its unqualified text, the Second Amendment is not absolute.”

I don’t know, but, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state...” sure sounds like a qualification to me. I wonder how the originalists missed that.

Jon Rufsvold, Anaheim