There is no reason for a private citizen to have an assault rifle. He can’t hunt with it; he can’t protect his home with it; and he can’t resist governmental oppression with it — the government has tanks, attack helicopters, stealth bombers, etc. The only hope with that is to keep the Armed Forces representative of the population and well-schooled in democratic values.
So there is no reason for an assault rifle to be available at all.
Sure, there should be better mental health screening and treatment and, sure, there should be better background checks. But there is still reason to restrict the weapon itself.
A crazy person with a knife can do some damage, but can do much more with an assault rifle.
So, to my way of thinking, if the public, through their representatives, permits a person to have an assault rifle and that person then shoots up a school with it, the public is partly responsible for those deaths.
Jonathan Cohen, Farmington
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.