To: Mike Donoghue – Free Press Staff Writer
Mike,
It continues to amaze me that the Free Press, with unabashed abandon, demonstrates a clear anti-gun agenda, regardless of the facts. I encourage you to thoroughly research anything you print provided by Gun Sense or similar groups before you accept them as gospel. When looking at the headline for Wednesday’s Online Sting Article, I would have thought law enforcement had performed a “sting” on Vermont gun buys. Then I find out it is a political lobbying group, with no law enforcement ties, that did a supposed tracking of Vermont gun buys; hardly an objective overview. No third party fact checking.
Most everything alluded to in the article is a violation of Federal Law. If Gun Sense and others are that concerned about it, why are they not going after the Feds to enforce current laws? Why in the world would Vermont want to get into trying to enforce federal law by enacting our own laws? We all pay federal taxes for enforcement of these laws. Why increase Vermont expenditures now, which we are ill equipped to do, because our federal tax dollars are not being used as dictated by law?
Interestingly you make note that Obama, after Sandy Hook, promised to change a number of gun laws. This failed in spite of the fact that the Senate was Democratically controlled. After a lot of fanfare and blather, the whole thing collapsed and went away. Sensible citizens know that defining mental illness, the common thread in all of the mass shootings, is nearly impossible. Furthermore, no one has been willing to circumvent privacy laws like HIPAA in notifying the national data base of someone “suspected” of developing some form of mental illness. Many people going through divorce, having lost their job or a loved one will go through a down period. Should all of these people go on the national registry? No one has been able to develop an accepted standard. How would someone get off of the list over time if they get better? This debacle is one of the main issues that proliferates violent gun crime and isn’t easily solvable. So what’s the easier alternative? Go after something easier; restrict gun rights.
More gun laws inhibit law abiding citizens from exercising their rights for self-protection under the Vermont and US constitutions and do nothing to prevent the cause of these tragic events. It is a clear example of the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”.
What the Free Press does is give a few emotional groups a place to spew their pure hatred for guns. That is what it is, a hatred of all guns and anything associated with guns! Unfortunately you won’t give the pro-gun citizens/groups the same opportunity to present the facts. They, Gun Sense, Michael Bloomberg, Every Town, etc. refuse to look at the facts or the real cause of gun violence in America. They just say to the rest of the world, “you don’t get it”. No we don’t!
In Friday’s paper, on the front page at the bottom is a headline that says “TSA finds record number of guns on planes“. Note, the operative word is “ON” planes. On page 1B, the actual article really tells the story. Guns were not found on planes. They were found during the security check points prior to boarding. I certainly hope this wasn’t an intentional “over sight”, but somehow find that a little hard to believe. The headline sure got my attention!
If you haven’t already, you should take a look at the two web sites below as Gun owners of Vermont spent a lot of time and effort putting the facts together.
https://gunownersofvermont.org/
Points to remember:
Vermont is the safest state in the nation. Period!
Vermont is the shining example of responsible gun ownership for the nation
Vermont has one of the highest, if not the highest, gun ownership ratios in the nation (50{c78b7ea562d14aa1f08e4d48fa5838cee7e11fea7bb763f970182b84d63034ca}-70{c78b7ea562d14aa1f08e4d48fa5838cee7e11fea7bb763f970182b84d63034ca} of all households have a firearm)
Gun Sense Vermont likes to say their proposed gun restrictions won’t interfere with hunters. Maybe they better understand it is the constitutional rights of gun owners (who may be hunters) where the “rub” comes in
Violent crime has come down about 50{c78b7ea562d14aa1f08e4d48fa5838cee7e11fea7bb763f970182b84d63034ca} nationwide since 1993. 32 states passed pro-gun legislation in 2014. The perennial anti-gun states i.e., NY, MA, NJ, CA passed additional gun laws that exacerbated their already high crime rates. Their crime rates are on average 400{c78b7ea562d14aa1f08e4d48fa5838cee7e11fea7bb763f970182b84d63034ca} higher than Vermont. What does Gun Sense and others want? They want Vermont law to mirror states like NY, MA, etc. Why? I would call that regressive thinking at best.
Concealed carry has contributed to and is credited as a major reason for the decline in violent crime. Texas and Florida give credit to concealed carry as a having a positive effect for a continuing drop in violent crime since allowing CC state wide. A Washington Times article of August 24, 2014 headlined the following: Chicago crime rate drops as concealed carry applications surge; City sees fewer homicides, robberies, burglaries, car thefts as Illinois residents take arms. (this means more guns, not less – my comment) Bottom line less restricted legal gun ownership is the trend across the entire nation.
Women are the fastest growing segment of gun ownership and are demanding a voice in gun rights discussions
Shortly we will see the Burlington charter changes land at the legislators door step. Again there is no empirical data or facts that justify any one of these proposed law changes other than continuing to expand the nanny state. A handful of liberal and progressive consolers pushed this agenda as another “feel good” venture. Norm Blaise in today’s FP said that the charter changes will only affect Burlington residents. That is incorrect as it could very well lead to any community following suit resulting in a patchwork of gun laws across the state. It isn’t as innocuous as they want you to think. Almost every state has now adopted preemption regarding firearm restrictions at the state level to prevent such an event happening in their states. Vermont adopted such a law years ago; Act 178 .2291(8). There is no justification to change it. Gun Sense wants to change that so that they can use a “conquer and divide” methodology to expand a piece at a time to reach their objectives.
I hope that I have made some sense here and that it will give some pause for thought before you publish any more articles on gun control law changes in Vermont.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce Lindner