Bombs don’t kill.
People do.
Doesn’t sound quite right, does it?
If the type of weapon used to kill is inconsequential, why not permit average citizens to make bombs at home?
The obvious answer: Bombs have the capacity to kill many people in seconds. Accordingly, the safety of the general public outweighs whatever gratification someone might receive from making home explosives.
Military style rifles have the capacity to kill multiple individuals in a matter of seconds. It is what they are designed to do.
Restricting the accessibility of assault-style weapons makes total sense.
Improved mental health screening and treatment will never reliably identify all individuals likely to commit violence.
When, inevitably, somebody decides to randomly kill, the choice of weapon impacts the number of people killed and injured.
If the power of a weapon is inconsequential, why restrict homemade bombs?
Raymond Tardif, Auburn
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.