Response to "Our View" column in the Prospector (aka West Valley News) 7-22-01

During the recent Independence Day celebration, I was anxiously awaiting a Fourth of July fireworks show. I closed my eyes, and buried my face in my
hands to sneeze. The instant I sneezed, the fireworks began. I quickly concluded that my sneeze caused the fireworks. A reasonable conclusion, right?

Wrong!

Last week's "Our View" column in the Prospector was based on similar ill-reasoned logic. The column stated that gun-related offenses in the United Kingdom have risen 40% from 1997 to 1999. Although there could be numerous factors contributing to this rise, the author used the fact that Britain tightened gun regulations in 1997 as proof that further gun regulation in America won't work.

Consider this. In 1999, gun-related offenses in England rose to an alarming high of 3,685. In America during the same period there were 533,470 gun-related serious violent crimes (U.S. Department of Justice, 2000 NCVS). Even when these statistics are corrected for the population difference of our countries, the U.S. has 33 times more gun-related crimes than the UK. Statistics speak further about the American gun problem. In 1996, the year before our former colonial oppressors embraced gun-banning fanaticism with newfound zeal, only 30 gun-related murders were committed. The U.S. had over 10,000 gun-related murders. Over 30,000 Americans died from gunfire. Do you realize that more Americans were killed with guns in a year in the U.S. than died fighting for our independence during the American Revolution?!?

Draw your own conclusion. But don't you dare call me a gun-banning fanatic because I believe sensible gun regulation is necessary in America!

Gun regulation is a serious topic deserving of thoughtful consideration, not misleading NRA-induced rhetoric. I hold this belief firmly. I also believe last week's "Our View" is, to borrow a phrase, "full of malarkey!"