LETTER: We could use new gun laws

To the editor:

Richard Winters recently wrote an article that called for absolutely no new laws that might restrict our Second Amendment rights. He wrote that the Second Amendment was all about keeping our government in check and our communities safe. The latter point is arguably true; however, the former point is not. We keep our government in check by voting in elections, not by keeping a safe full of hardware in our basement; that’s just how this country works. 

I believe that the Second Amendment is actually about what we need and gun enthusiasts conflate that with what they want. Here’s what I mean: all you need for personal defense is a single sidearm, like a pistol, that you can carry around in a holster and all you need to go hunting is a bow, hunting rifle or a hunting shotgun. What we do not need for personal defense are LMGs, SMGs, .50 cal sniper rifles, assault rifles or combat shotguns. These are things that you use to wage a small war. They are not necessities unless you plan on killing a whole lot of people. This is precisely what a handful of mentally disturbed people are doing in this country; they are waging a war. Not waging war against armies or solders but waging war against elementary school students. That is unacceptable. Look, I’ll be the first to admit that military-grade hardware is pretty cool, but it is not a necessity. We do not need it, and if these instruments are making mass slaughter not only possible but trivial for the wicked, then I think we should all take one for the team and give up that shiny new AR-15.

I’m not for trampling over the second amendment; it’s in the constitution for a reason. I’m just for taking reasonable steps to prevent mass-slaughter. 

Ben Maxfield