The root cause of gun violence is guns: Letters
The root cause of gun violence is guns
April 19 − To the Editor:
I would like to respond to Cheryl Russell’s opinion on April 18, "The root cause of gun violence is not guns."
As a former Sunday School teacher, current Christian, and believer in facts and the scientific method, I find her claims preposterous and dangerous.
Here is why:
∎ Gun violence has no correlation with Christianity, or lack thereof, as she claims. One of the safest countries in the world, Japan, is not a predominantly Christian country. The USA, a country “founded on Christian values” (her exact words), leads the developed world in gun violence. Our only competitors are Christian countries such as Venezuela and El Salvador, poor company to keep. Stop blaming lack of Christianity for gun violence. Guns are the cause of gun violence.
∎ Gun violence has no correlation with the incidence of mental illness. Mental illness is a constant worldwide in its prevalence. I have a master’s degree in human genetics and would welcome evidence or scientific publications to the contrary. Stop blaming mental illness for gun violence. Guns are the cause of gun violence.
∎ “The US is the Only Country Among Its Peers In Which Guns Are the Leading Cause of Death Among Children and Teens”. Kaiser Family Foundation data, July 8th, 2022.
∎ In Cheryl Russell’s words, “The murderer in all documented cases has acted out of hatred, vengeance, bigotry or mental illness”. This is completely unfounded and untrue, and an attempt (in my opinion) to ignore the facts. The recent murders of a 20 year old woman in NY who happened to be in the wrong driveway, the shooting of a teenage boy attempting to pick up his young siblings, and the critical shooting of two cheerleaders in Texas in a parking lot had nothing to do with any of the causes she mentioned. Guns are the cause of gun violence.
The only factor strongly correlated with the incidence of gun violence is the number of guns. If guns kept us safe, the US would be the safest country in the world.
Mark Baldassare
Portsmouth
Putting school resource officers in Portsmouth elementary schools shouldn't be a heavy lift
April 19 − To The Editor:
The fact that someone was arrested for threatening a violent and abhorrent act in the Portsmouth School System has shocked and outraged the community. Today, I see the hue and cry for something to be done and those demanding this are totally on point.
The knee jerk reactions from the local elected officials are normal and predictable. The letter writers with the revolving suffixes are also the norm at times like this and I see them in today’s paper as well.
The suggestion of getting School Resource Officers in all schools is the best and most reasonable idea that has been proffered. There is absolutely no reason that the Council cannot have some special meetings, get funding, and allocate resources immediately for such an exigent circumstance. We waste millions of dollars on “consultants” to advise us on signs, accessory buildings, sidewalks, parks, and other absolutely non-essential things. We should be able to get this done without a consultant.
It is time the Council made special votes, meetings, and allocations of people and money, now, today. Next, as horrific as it sounds, secure the schools, that includes doors, exits, and any access. Before the next crank squeals like a stuck pig about that, remember if a bad person cannot get in, it is far less likely that a bad thing could occur as sad as that sounds to have to do.
Contact your Legislators! Where are Jeanne and Maggie? They are both local and come out when we need them for government building acquisitions, noise abatement walls, and other such important things. We need them now to get legislation to make a reasonable attempt to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, the criminally inclined, and those who are not responsible. I support this wholly and fully.
Lastly, all those parents, city leaders and other supposed stakeholders need to remember the police stopped the woman who killed six students in Tennessee with a gun. She was shot and killed before she killed more innocent people. Why is that footage not on the television or on these pages. It would certainly show other would-be criminals that this is what is waiting for them.
T. Stephen McCarthy
Portsmouth
Update the National Firearms Act of 1934
April 20 − To the Editor:
Two opinion pieces from Dr. Fieseher and Jim Mastro pretty much reinforced the thoughts that have been on my mind for years now. Let me add a few thoughts of my own. From a historical perspective, our politicians were a bit more capable and/or braver 90 to 100 years ago. Many of the pressures of that time appear to apply again.
Back in the early 1930s, the public was growing weary of gangsters gunning people down in the streets. Congress acted. One of the catalyzing events was the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre in 1929, when seven adults were killed. Seven is sadly a low number by today’s standards.
The legislation applied a tax to automatic weapons and made some other changes. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act] Thompson submachine guns, originally developed for WW1, were one of the go to weapons for gangsters. Sure you could keep your automatic Thompson, but it would cost you a $200 tax. The tax was challenged, but it was determined that congress had the authority to institute taxes. That $200 in 1934 equates to nearly $4,500 today if inflation is considered. If you compare an automatic Thompson to some modern semi-automatic weapons, many of the modern weapons can meet or exceed the rate of fire and projectile energy of the regulated Thompsons. All it takes is installing simple trigger or stock add-on device/accessory. If a weapon can easily meet or exceed the firepower of an automatic weapon, a tax should be similarly applied, and at this point, adjusted for inflation. It seemed to work before, so let’s try it again.
The revenue should first go to the surviving family members who continue to suffer such horrific losses, have to pay for the funerals and lose the income that the departed might have made during their lives. If there is anything left over, perhaps the folks/taxpayers who paid to educate the children, only to have them shot and killed could be reimbursed as well. Note that I am not trying to be insensitive, but just beyond exasperation at this point. I am tired of weeping for those lost and refuse to become numb to these avoidable tragedies.
Don CavallaroRye
If guns make us safe why are so many people being shot and killed?
April 20 − To the Editor:
How many times have you heard a politician say after a mass shooting: "It isn’t a gun problem. It is a mental health problem”? Actually, it is both.
Every country has people with mental health issues, but most have fewer mass shootings in a year than we average per day. The reason is simple. When another country suffers from a mass shooting, their politicians enact laws to limit access to guns. Their politicians are sane.
Many of ours are not. Since the Sandy Hook school shooting many states, including New Hampshire, made it easier to get weapons, to legally carry weapons and conceal weapons. They legalized ownership of semiautomatic weapons with large magazines. Even worse are the states that passed laws making it legal to shoot unarmed people by claiming you were afraid of them.
How do states address the so-called mental health problems and guns? They do not. They only think someone has a mental health problem after they commit a mass shooting. How sane is it to allow the sale of weapons to people the politicians said had mental health problems. It is not sane.
We have more guns in this country than people. If guns made us safer, we would be the safest country on earth. We are the opposite because of our insane politicians.
Walter Hamilton
Portsmouth
This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: The root cause of gun violence is guns: Letters
