Re: "A sad, cynical defeat of gun laws," Ted Thomas,
letters, April 21.
Although I believe Mr. Thomas has a genuine concern about protecting innocent lives, his statements reveal an obvious bias! Ninety percent of Americans want "better" gun control, not necessarily "more." In 2012 alone there were 16,000 people who tried to buy guns illegally, but were denied because of background checks - only 44 were prosecuted. We have strict gun laws and no one more than the NRA is pushing for stricter enforcement of those laws. Why are the Feds not enforcing existing gun laws against criminals instead of wanting to pass new gun laws infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens?
Progressives believe those checks and balances established by our founding fathers to limit government are archaic and want them changed to more fit their way of thinking. Conservatives don't believe they should be changed to fit an individual ideology.
Mr. Thomas' bias is revealed when he calls only the GOP gutless for folding to the NRA when in fact the gun bill could have passed in the Senate if it were not for five Democrat senators voting against it. The statement "if we just give up a little of our freedoms to save one child, wouldn't it be worth it" is blatantly disingenuous. Neither Mr. Thomas nor the President want to ban children from riding in cars, ban hammers, pressure cookers or any number of things that would save not just one child, but many more thousands than are killed by guns.
Instead, they disgustingly use the tragedy of a child's death to push an agenda. Benjamin Franklin wrote "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Let's have an honest debate, not ideological fear mongering.
Scott Norton, Silverthorne