In response to the letter from James and Doris Baker in the Jan. 3 Advocate-Messenger, I first wish to thank Mr. Baker for his service during World War II. He is part of what Tom Brokaw called “The Greatest Generation” and this country certainly owes him thanks. I am also a retired veteran, having served in Vietnam in 1967.
I take exception to his view on the National Rifle Association’s statement that guns don’t kill people, only people kill people. I believe that statement is accurate, and to agree with the Bakers would be tantamount to saying that alcohol kills but the alcoholic doesn’t. A drunken driver chooses to endanger lives when he drives drunk. If someone gets killed that driver is responsible because he chose a specific course of action. If someone is killed by a gun, the person behind the trigger is totally responsible, not the gun.
Would I use an AR-15 to protect my home and family? I would, but taking the Bakers’ words at face value, that would make me a coward. Would I go out and shoot innocent, unarmed victims? No. That would make me a coward. But simply owning a firearm does not make anyone a coward.
I am also quite perplexed why Mr. Baker, as a veteran, is now arguing against one of the basic rights men like us fought to protect, and is guaranteed by the Constitution of The United States. My heart also cries out for those innocent victims of the many shootings that have occurred in this country, but better enforcement of existing laws and better background searches is the answer to effective gun control. Trying to take away legal gun rights is not the answer.