Response to assault-type rifle letter to the editor
Saturday December 29, 2012 | By:Gary Ebert |
I’d like to say, in the beginning, that I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for those of you, former and present, in law enforcement.
In response to retired Patrol Deputy Starr’s assertion that, “we’ve made it to easy for multiple slaughters to occur,” the truth is, the government and businesses, with their “gun-free zones,” are what made these massacres possible.
We never hear of attacks on police stations and gun shows, where there are armed people. If our government refuses to protect our children with trained, armed security, we can only expect another mentally-ill person to attack. The politicians in Texas have begun instituting armed security in schools, to protect the most vulnerable and valuable among us.
As to Deputy Starr’s comment about it being time to ban “assault-type rifles;” full-automatic weapons have been illegal since the 1930s. I would like to point out, it is in an individual’s right to be able to protect themselves with whatever legal gun he or she feels is necessary.
The term “assault-type rifles” is a term our media placed on guns. Our government and police are not responsible for protecting us. We are responsible for protecting ourselves.
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981): “A government and its agencies are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen.” – Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981).
Politicians like Gov. Cuomo threatening to confiscate guns may sound good and make anti-gun people feel good, but does nothing to protect our school kids.