Controlling Firearms

In your editorial you quote state Sen. Lockyer as stating, “When you start in a free society searching people’s cars without cause--just doing it because you know there is a general safety problem--we should all as free Americans worry about that.”

I fully agree with this, as the relinquishing of one’s freedoms in order to fight crime is not the correct course of action. However, other editorials in The Times have come out in favor of banning assault rifles. How anyone could fail to equate the two is beyond me. Even if either proposition would serve to curb crime, it is not worth the price that law-abiding citizens who choose to drive in neighborhoods that have a high crime rate, or those who choose to own a type of gun that happens to be used in crimes must pay.

Both proposals are coming at a time when the current fad in politics is fighting the gang problem, and both are the kind of quick solutions that probably won’t work but will serve to make headlines for their respective sponsors.

This quote could easily read, “When you start in a free society taking people’s guns without cause--just doing it because you know there is a general safety problem--we should all as free Americans worry about that.”

These proposals may not be equal, but they are equivalent in intent and effect.

JIM BILAKOVICS

Escondido