The headline on the March 31 commentary “The Blade buys assault rifle within minutes” implies that deputy editorial page editor Jeff Gerritt made a straw purchase for The Blade. For the sake of Mr. Gerritt and The Blade, people should hope that isn’t true.
The AR-15 semiautomatic rifle that is the subject of his column does not show up in the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives definition of an assault rifle. I ask that The Blade direct me, and others, to the federal regulations that define it as such.
If Mr. Gerritt and The Blade are trying to show how easy it is for a law-abiding citizen to purchase a rifle, all that you proved was that the background check system works as it is supposed to work. If you are trying to make some other point, it is lost.
What are plans for bought gun?
Why would Mr. Gerritt leave the Toledo area to purchase an assault rifle when local dealers need the business? Does he not support our local economy?
Now that he is the owner of such a destructive weapon, what does he plan to do with it? Will he look for a gang member to sell it to at a huge profit? Does he have a vendetta to settle with an individual he doesn’t get along with?
You wouldn’t buy one unless you wanted to kill someone, or so I’ve read in The Blade.
If The Blade wanted to make a story of this, why didn’t you solicit someone with a known mental problem, or maybe a convicted felon, to make the purchase?
Editor’s note: The Blade will not resell the rifle.
What were titles of violent games?
I am sick of hearing about the AR-15 and other “assault weapons” falsely identified by the media.
I want The Blade to tell me the titles of the violent video games Adam Lanza, the Newton, Conn., gunman, played in his home. And would his mother pass the more stringent background checks that are proposed?
It is time mental health played a more dominant role, along with mass media accountability for violent crime.
A determined shooter dangerous
The problem is not so much the ability to purchase a military-type weapon, because any gun will kill a human. The problem is the number of bullets that can be fired before the shooter has to reload.
Background checks and magazine size are two major concerns to most sensible Americans.
A person with a gun who is intent on killing likely will succeed, no matter how many guns people who are being targeted have.
Presidents John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan were protected by men with guns, yet history tells their tales.
Not just anyone can buy a gun fast
Mr. Gerritt’s column suggests that anyone can buy a gun as easily as he did. That’s true if the buyer has no record. With the speed with which a credit card can be processed, I’m surprised the purchase took as long as it did.
The headline says The Blade bought the rifle, while the column indicates Mr. Gerritt bought it. Could this be like the “straw purchase” he mentions?
Gun control is un-American
Mr. Gerritt’s tirade about guns is control-freak propaganda I would expect from The Blade.
The powerful “gun lobby” he mentions is composed of millions of citizens who value the Second Amendment and our tradition of armed citizens, as spelled out in the Constitution.
Gun control in any form is un-American.
Gun owners must be responsible
Those who believe it is their constitutional right to own a gun should speak up for responsible ownership.
Every sale of a gun, through a licensed gun store or a personal exchange at a gun show or on the Internet, should be required to be registered with an authorized agency in the county where the buyer lives.
Registration would have to be renewed annually and verify original ownership.
If and when a crime is committed with a gun, its last registered owner should be held responsible.
Gun ownership levels suggested
If you own a gun for protection and keep it secured in your home, that's fine.
If you carry a gun with the fantasy of taking out some bad guys, you should have your head examined.
If you have a stockpile of guns to fight the government, you need to be put on a watch list.