Thomas way off the
mark on gun control
Bob Thomas' editorials, though peppered with his numerous accomplishments and name dropping, are usually informative whether one agrees or disagrees with his views. His July 26 piece is so far off the mark it's not only asinine, but dangerous.
Mr. Thomas' answer to the shooting in Colorado is to change the gun laws? He claims if somebody were packing, things would have been different.
This was the setting: The theater was dark when Holmes opened the side exit door, blinding many. Those who could see thought Holmes was a character from "Batman." Holmes tossed a homemade canister of tear gas into the seats and started killing people instantly.
People couldn't see or were choking, and Bob thinks a kill shot could have been made? Really? Holmes had a bulletproof vest!
I am not against the Second Amendment, but this attitude of "If I was there with my weapon, things would have been different" has to go. You wouldn't freeze up or shoot an innocent person?
Mr. Thomas, ask a person who has been in a fire fight. I have. These soldiers share a certain look and answer: "It's not like the movies. No amount of training can prepare you." And they were prepared. Yes, Holmes should die, but packing is not a solution.
I'll say what Bob didn't. To all the victims, especially those that died shielding another, and survivors: You are heroes. To the family members, friends and everyone affected by Holmes' cowardly act: My thoughts and prayers are with you.
What does 'sensible' actually mean?
According to Mr. Sean Mick what this country needs is sensible, well-regulated gun control. He doesn't define "sensible" or who will determine what "sensible" is.
There are over 20,000 gun laws on the books. I don't know if they are sensible.
There isn't a gun law in the world that will prevent these mass shootings.
Mass shootings usually occur where guns are banned and never in police stations or gun ranges. Why do you suppose that is, Mr. Mick?
Frank D. Millslagle