I would like to respond regarding the recent commentary of Paul Christopher, who believes that all semi-automatic and pistols in America should be immediately confiscated and destroyed.
I would think that all of the veterans who have semi-automatic rifles from service during World War II, Korea and Vietnam, would certainly have something to say about the collection and destruction of guns, which they defended our country from aggressors on foreign soil. I would also believe that the children, sons and daughters who are heirs to these guns, would speak out against their confiscation and destruction.
Why is it that foreign nations such as Switzerland have citizens that complete military training and are issued machine guns, which they alone are individually responsible for, have gun violence and crime rates that are virtually non-existent?
Mr. Christopher believes that it has become necessary to inhibit the ability of a person to lawfully own a semi-automatic firearm. Although I concede that some people would argue that there is no appropriate use of a semi-automatic firearm in today's society, where does one stop the confiscation and destruction of any gun? What's next? Pump action shotguns - or just any gun that looks scary?
The federal, state and local governments allow that I may carry a concealed pistol on my person for protection, target shooting, etc. With all of the firearm training which I have received, why must I limit the type of gun and ammunition which I may legally purchase and carry, just because a few warped individuals, who have obtained these guns illegally, have caused others to suffer?
Banning semi-automatic, high-capacity magazines and the ammunition for these rifles and pistols has done nothing to prevent any crime rates from increasing. Long prison terms should be enforced; not against the legal gun owner but by the judge who is issuing the sentencing to these thugs, who are committing these terrible gun crimes in the first place.
BRADLEY D. TROUTNER,