For those of you who are interested in a real gun debate resolution…
I would offer this concession, when you can verify that 95% of the criminals, felons and those who otherwise shouldn’t have guns do not have guns, we can start a meaningful debate on establishing a litmus test of what is mentally required for somebody to continue to own or possess a firearm.
Might I remind you there are already laws on the books to legally accomplish this.
Therefore, until then you step up and do your part, anyone advocating for more and stricter gun legislation is just pointing fingers and trying to cast blame as an excuse for something that you and you’re advocates have failed to do yourselves.
It is completely disingenuous and law-abiding gun owners won’t stand to be held responsible for it.
John H. Rutherford
San Marcos, Texas
The San Marcos City Council received a presentation on the Sidewalk Maintenance and Gap Infill…
The San Marcos River Rollers have skated through obstacles after taking a two-year break during…
San Marcos Corridor News has been reporting on the incredible communities in the Hays County…
Visitors won't be able to swim in the crystal clear waters of the Jacobs Well Natural…
Looking to adopt or foster animals from the local shelter? Here are the San Marcos…
The Lone Star State leads the nation in labor-related accidents and especially workplace deaths and…
This website uses cookies.
View Comments
Amen!
Two thumbs up! The truth always trumps propaganda!
Only people from the government, or people who want to govern you, should own guns.
You cannot trust citizens to responsibly own firearms, they will possibly shoot another person who simply needs a simple way to earn money who may need a gun to do it. A friend recently brought to my attention how immigrants probably need a gun to defend themselves against ignorant citizens who carry guns and oppose immigration.
There are many good reasons why against gun ownership. Guns make people stupid, and stupid people should never be allowed to carry a weapon and the poster's letter just proves it.
That is really a novel approach . It is At odds with the constitution and 200 years if history in the USA. Perhaps you would be more at ease in Australia.
GViKA
Your level of ignorance should hurt.
Persons who may need a firearm to earn easy money are typically called ‘criminals’.
Your next sentence advocates for illegal immigrants to possess firearms.
If it were not for responsible men refusing to give up their means of protection ‘firearms’ we would not have this United States of America or our constitution.