Letter: Some weapons are not for civilians
I read Luke McCullock's letter to the Reformer on April 3 with great interest. I agree with him that detailed, time consuming background checks are reasonable and should be mandatory for firearm procurement.
What I guess I don't understand, especially after talking with my friend who is a gun owner and a very experienced hunter for 35 years, is why exactly anyone would need a 7.62 millimeter, semi-automatic rifle with all the attachments and with 20 round capacity magazines. My friend explained to me that someone may take this weapon out to a shooting range and use it for target practice. But my friend didn't think that taking this weapon out to the shooting range would actually make one a better shot; that is, like a better shooter when you are trying to down a deer from 200 yards away.
I don't argue with Mr. McCullock's right to own the aforementioned firearm currently. My personal opinion is that these types of firearms don't have a great purpose except in a military sense. There is no reason that a civilian should have these types of weapons and the attendant high capacity magazines. I think that, along with his advocacy of background checks, we should be trying to eliminate the ability to own and procure these weapons as well.
Townshend, April 4
TALK TO US
If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom.