In response to Jerry Maertens letter of May 2:
I find myself again responding to someone who has the misconception that hunting has anything to do with my selection of any weapon. I don鈥檛 know if people are just using 鈥渉unting鈥� or 鈥渟porting鈥� as an anti-gun script or whether the liberal media has actually completely brainwashed people into believing that without a 鈥渟porting purpose鈥� weapons are not protected.
ADVERTISEMENT
In 1994 I watched with great interest the congressional hearings on the proposed 1994 crime bill. This is the bill that became known as the 鈥渁ssault weapons ban.鈥� One of the testimonies that struck me, and has since been a part of my thought process, was from a congressman who said basically this:
鈥淎 few months ago, capitol police came to us and told us that they were expecting racial unrest, and that if we lived within the beltway, they would be able to protect us. If we lived outside of the beltway, as I do, they recommend that we be prepared to protect ourselves. With that, I went to a gun store and I bought the highest capacity, the most lethal shotgun I could buy. I had no intentions of shooting sporting clays with it, nor did I have any intentions of hunting game with it. I purchased this weapon to defend myself and my family.鈥�
In spite of his poetic defense of the true purpose of the Second Amendment, the 鈥渁ssault weapon ban鈥� passed. After 10 years, even the politicians pushing for the bill admitted that it had no effect and the bill was allowed to sunset.
First off, let us please dispense with the 鈥渟porting purpose鈥� claims. Secondly, instead of blaming the rifle, let鈥檚 try to actually come up with something that may actually reduce the violence we are witnessing. Banning millions of law-abiding citizens from possessing the AR-15 is certainly not going to end these senseless killings.
Mike Milli
Bemidji
