Immorality to blame for growing violence
It is past time that we accept that it is not guns, instruments, that kill; killing comes from the hearts of the human race and the lack of accepting responsibility for our own actions. Our society is bombarded by TV, video games, the Internet, all promoting violence, pornography, killing and adultery as OK. We allow this and are unwilling to accept responsibility and put a stop to this; we blame everything and everybody else.
We have taken the teaching of good morals out of our schools, out of our homes, out of society; telling our young, in a not-so-silent way, that morals are unimportant and old-fashioned.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you has gotten lost by the wayside, and our selfish hearts only see do unto others before they do unto you, with no sense of conscience or remorse.
No matter how many police, guns and laws exist, there is going to be violence in our society. It will get worse unless the morals of right and wrong are reintroduced and adhered to by the families of our society. Too many depend on the government to solve our problems. The government is the least capable to accomplish this; only people themselves can solve the problem.
Whether we wish to accept the fact that God really exists is up to our society, but God is the only answer, like it or not.
Walter S. Walker
Cayce
Assault-weapon ban is not a cure-all
I guess some people, like Stan Frick (“Change culture of guns, violence,” Jan. 31), are naive enough to think that we will all be safe if our lawmakers will “support the 98.6 percent of Americans who are not members of the NRA and protect innocent citizens from gun violence” by banning the production of assault weapons.
Besides the fact that the majority of U.S. gun owners aren’t members of the NRA ,any reasonable thinking citizen should realize that banning assault rifles is not a solution. The Sandy Hook perpetrator could have committed his ungodly acts with any weapon created in the past 100 years with the identical achingly sad results.
It is facile and human to vilify a certain type of weapon so the public can rally against something seemingly concrete .This is so much easier than facing the deeper issue, which is not so concrete: the motivation to take innocent lives that resides in the mind of the mentally ill person who commits an atrocity.
Can our lawmakers protect us from the evil that resides in some men’s hearts? If not, then ask yourself how much safer you really would be with one type of rifle owned by more than a million responsible citizens outlawed. Is banning any type of gun really a solution or just a quick emotional rallying point that masks the deeper problems our society faces?
Chip McPheeters
Columbia
Even with decline, violence too high
If the Jan. 31 guest column by Edmund Higgins was intended as a caution against the need for gun control, it misses several crucial points (“Violence in America, S.C. is on the decline”).
Of course violence has gone down over the centuries. Could that be because government has controlled it? Could it be because of laws that punish and prevent the most egregious acts? Gun control represents just one more step in helping us proceed down that road of civilization.
When one looks at change over large spans of time, a large amount of data — and in this case a lot of tragedy and carnage — is lost. Try telling folks in the Dark Ages that the Spanish Inquisition was just part of the decline in violence. I’m certain they didn’t see the big picture. Try telling it to the parents of those Newtown children.
It’s so hard for me to believe that Americans will sit on their hands and let a minority of the population dictate death for so many, all because they’re afraid of some slippery slope to gun confiscation.
Where are those “jack-booted thugs” the NRA fantasizes about when we most need them? Responsible members of the NRA must convey their feelings to their president, Mr. Cold-Dead-Hands LaPierre.
Patricia Mohr
Columbia
Obama wrong on gun control
I read recently that the president wants the gun advocates to listen better to his gun-control plan. He wants the American people to sway his way and only his way by telling them what is best for them. I don’t think most people want more gun control, so the president should go along with that view.
Vice President Biden is right in saying that more gun control will not stop the massacres but could restrict access with better background checks at gun shows.
More gun laws are like more DUI laws. They have not eliminated the slaughter on our highways. The drunk drivers continue to drink and drive and kill people despite all the laws. So more gun laws will not stop would-be killers.
The president seems to think that gun control, immigration reform and climate change are more important than the real issues facing this country, like the millions of people still out of jobs, the deficit and Social Security and Medicare problems.
So he is telling us to listen more. I believe he needs to listen more to what the people want — not what he wants.
Steve Hanayik
West Columbia
NRA putting guns ahead of children
It broke the hearts of most Americans when those precious children in Newtown were killed, and for a few days we talked about doing something about it. Then the NRA began to talk about its members’ right to bear arms, and somehow any mention of the children was lost.
I ask you: Which is more important, the children or the guns?
The National Rifle Association is puzzling. Rifle is a part of its title, and no one is planning to take the rifles from members.
They rant about the Second Amendment. Our Founding Fathers were informed by the idea of the British trying to prevent a rebellion by keeping us from having guns. That was more than 200 years ago.
The Second Amendment was written with the idea that guns would be in the hands of responsible, law-abiding citizens. According to Justice John Paul Stevens, they would be for organized state militia, not civilians.
The individuals who speak for the NRA come across as angry and almost violent in their presentations. As I have watched them on television, the thought has crossed my mind that I would not want to see people like that with a gun. It could be dangerous.
The NRA should be the first to stand up and demand that assault weapons be outlawed. Its members should be recognized as responsible, law-abiding citizens. Right now they are not. To answer my own question, I think the children are more important.
Thom Bristow
Columbia
Reduce access to killing equipment
Sen. Lindsey Graham is not telling the truth when he says his office has received no calls from supporters of legislation for weapons control. I and many others have called his office and written letters on the need to reduce the proliferation of assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines.
Gun lovers are embarrassing themselves. Their raving defense of any and all guns merely illustrates how obnoxious their obsession is. Where are our rights to the pursuit of happiness and a civilized life, when these violent-minded people have the upper hand? It is time to acknowledge that the big business of an expanding gun market is driving most of the infantile zeal.
Reducing the stupidly easy access to the kind of killing equipment and ammunition used in recent tragedies will help make our society safe. It will reduce the possibility of classrooms full of bullet-riddled bodies.
Please support the president and others in the effort to increase public safety. At least make it a little harder instead of insanely easy to acquire mass-killing equipment .
Elizabeth Wiley
Pawleys Island
Amend Constitution to restrict guns
The four conservative members of the United States Supreme Court appear to be “Originalists” in that they do not believe that the U.S. Constitution is a flexible, changeable document dependent on the current needs of our country. This position, in fact, was envisioned by the Founders, who established ways to amend the Constitution by ratification of three-quarters of the states. To date, this process has produced 28 amendments to the Constitution.
With the senseless slaughter of innocents by firearms, it is time to amend the Second Amendment to restrict the sale and possession of handguns and assault weapons. In 2010, 31,076 Americans died by homicide, suicide and accidental shootings by guns. Another 73,505 Americans were treated in hospitals for gunshot wounds.
Perhaps if the Founders had known that modern handguns and assault weapons can fire better than one bullet per second, they would have included some restrictions to prevent our present-day carnage.
Philip W. Wolfe
Bluffton
Abortion contributes to culture of death
Former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and many others have rightly decried the recent horrible mass murders by gunfire. Surely better gun control and mental health are needed. However, little attention is given to the contributing factor of the serious decline in the respect for life in our country.
Our Constitution grants the right to life, but legalized abortion kills more than 3,000 innocent, defenseless, unborn babies every day, although ultrasounds and heartbeats show them to be very much alive. How much has abortion contributed to the decline in the respect for life?
Robert W. Degenhart
Columbia
NRA profits from gun sales
The Newtown massacre of children should be the absolute limit of America’s tolerance for the slaughter of innocents. Australians sickened of these mass killings, and their government outlawed assault weapons. So should we. No valid reason has been given for anyone except our military to have the capability to annihilate so many in mere seconds.
While most NRA members consider themselves a benign consolidation of game hunters and target shooters, the NRA is very much into the arms business and profits from gun and ammunition sales. One gun dealer — MidwayUSA — has contributed more than $7 million to the NRA through a customer “round-up” program. So of course the NRA proposal is to arm teachers and guards at every entrance; that’s good for increasing gun sales and profit.
Sadly, many of our legislators vote as the NRA dictates, knowing that the money and votes of the organization determines their re-elections.
Maxine Dexter
Aiken
