Return to story

Sensible solutions must be found to reduce carnage

December 20, 2012 12:10 am

I am a longtime conservative and I believe that owning a weapon is a freedom given to us by our forefathers in the Constitution. I have had a rifle and shotgun ever since I was 12 years old and enjoyed hunting, target-shooting, and competitive shooting.

I owned a pistol in my early years, but as soon as my children were able to crawl, I made the decision to sell it. I do not see the reason for assault rifles or pistols with high-capacity ammo clips or super high-firing rates. These types of weapons should be available only to military and law enforcement. No one, whether for hunting or self-protection, needs an assault weapon with a 30- or 50-round banana clip, nor an automatic pistol with a 15-round capacity. The sale and storage of ammunition should also have some restrictions.

I know a world-be disaster survivalist who has a laser-sighted M-16, an Uzi, and a number of Glock-style pistols in his home with over 10,000 rounds of ammo. I asked him what he would do if his home caught fire and firefighters got mowed down by all that exploding ammo. What about the neighbors and children?

I believe all new weapons sold to the public should be capable of holding a maximum of 10 rounds, and that they have keyed slots for ammo clips that would prevent the use of older high-capacity clips. Assault-style weapons are for those who want to play soldier. We have a good outlet for those desires in the military, the reserves, or law enforcement. They are no good for hunting and while they are fun to shoot, they are not necessary for hunting or protection.

It is time to come together, revisit the issue, and make the necessary changes that will reduce the carnage. Too many lives are being snuffed out unnecessarily. We can make sensible changes: If only a few lives are saved, it will be worth the effort.

Larry J. Ottolini


Copyright 2014 The Free Lance-Star Publishing Company.