Mailbag: Civilians don't need automatic weapons

Mailbag: Civilians don't need automatic weapons


I am not a gun advocate; however, I agree with Gary Hartman’s letter to the editor published in the Corvallis Gazette-Times' Jan. 7 edition. “We the people” have the right to bear arms. This is part of our Constitution and should remain so.

The part I think that should be clarified is the type of “arms.” We should not allow rapid repeat-fire guns. If these weapons are for “sport,” then we do not need a gun that repeats rapid firing multiple times. Give your game a fair chance! To begin with, is that not the reason for the sport?

We need to return to the original reason for our forefathers' inclusion of this portion of our Constitution. If the reason was truly for protection, then why are our police limited from automatic rapid-repeat weapons? If so, why can they not have them, but we can? I appreciate your input.

June Shaub



Catch the latest in Opinion

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.


News Alert

Breaking News