How Many Share Mr. Davey's Opinion?

I think what this reader is saying is that we do everything we can to stop a person from another country from coming here and killing people, but do nothing to stop Americans from killing each other.

To the Editor:

Re “Apparent Hate Crime Aimed at Jews Instead Strikes Christians Who Gave to Others” (news article, April 15):

Another senseless shooting; more needless deaths; another tragic episode made possible by the easy availability of deadly weapons.

Another reason to question why the Second Amendment exists. It is an outdated law that cannot be changed, that ties the hands of legislators and regulators whose first responsibility is to sustain an environment in which citizens can live free from fear of violence.

Every day there are stories concerned with national security; it’s peculiarly American to have a government so powerful in the national security arena, yet so powerless to help protect individual security.

ROBERT DAVEY
Bridgeport, Conn., April 15, 2014

And, if you want to read more about Michael Bloomberg's commitment to stopping the N.R.A., here is the link:  http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/04/17/can-bloomberg-take-on-the-nra

This is one comment that appeared in that discussion, and it's notable that here is someone from the UK who seems to know more about our history than most Americans:

gh

 manchester, uk 5 hours ago

The key to this whole debate is context. The second amendment was meant to apply to individuals, but states clearly that the reasoning behind this is so that well-regulated militias may exist. This is because at the time the constitution was written the US didn't have a large, peacetime standing army, so the only way to quickly raise a fighting force was if private citizens owned guns. This is clearly not a self-defense argument, nor is it a "tradition" argument, so frankly we should avoid it when discussing modern gun-control legislation, which is fundamentally about criminal activity, not national defense. There is no reason someone using a gun for self defense needs a 30 round magazine, and frankly, if he gets through more than a few rounds, he's not someone who should be trusted with a gun anyhow.

Here is another good point:

Northstar5

 Los Angeles 5 hours ago

Why don't our gutless politicians ever talk about the Ninth Amendment? That is the answer. The Ninth Amendment says that the aforementioned rights (the first 8 amendments) shall not be construed to deny or disparage other, un-enumerated rights the people may have.

The whole point of the Ninth Amendment is to create an 'out' in case one of the other Amendments conflicts with some obvious right that the people have but that has not been codified in the Constitution. The Founders had the foresight to understand that society changes and that some of the Amendments might end up conflicting with rights they had not yet thought would be an issue: like the right to go to school without fear that someone is going to open fire with an assault weapon and kill every child in sight. This was an unimaginable scenario to our Founders, and they were wise enough to know there were scenarios they could not imagine.

But no one ever talks about the Ninth Amendment. Most people don't even know what it says.

Acknowledgment of Heroin Epidemic

Police chiefs and other officials are meeting today in Washington, D.C. To discuss the growing heroin epidemic.  Included is a report on how police departments are responding, with data on the effectiveness of overdose antidotes that police are now carrying.  Coverage at usatoday.com

Look for mentions of how the new Affordable Care Act will help addicts get treatment.  Also look for indications that addiction should be seen as a medical issue, not a criminal justice issue.