I feel compelled to respond to the misguided, preconceived notions that Ms. Chambers purports on gun laws.
First of all, the overwhelming amount of gun laws on “the books” can’t help but have an adverse effect on the “legal, law-abiding gun owners.” I assume you have read and examined, in totality, all the present Rhode Island gun laws prior to submitting your letter on the laws that exist.
Your comment about the “gun lobby,” which you referenced, would be all those “law-abiding legal” gun owners. Who else could they be? That sentence is perhaps the only truth your letter puts forth for scrutiny. Criminals do not follow the rule of law. That is true of any criminal. Your non-argument theory can be rebuffed using the correlation between a “legal law-abiding” gun owner and an alcoholic who drives impaired. Stop signs and stop lights are also installed for public safety and health. Does the inebriated alcoholic run stop signs and lights when impaired? Yes! So why have them at all?
Fast forward, eight million new legal, law-abiding up to this point background-checked new gun owners have evolved. These new gun owners saw the need to protect themselves, should the time ever occur, due to the liberal Democrat Party policies, echoing defunding police, abolishing ICE, freeing already convicted criminals, and just the latest, the removal of funding for body armor for the brave men in blue.
The Democrat Party was very astute in their observation of this anomaly. First, they viewed this action as a threat to their lust for power and control over the “law-abiding” legal citizens, while also presenting the opportunity for an tax windfall. Henceforth, a proposal of a $200 registration for each gun and each magazine over 10-round capacity, an imposition of an insurance policy exclusively for “legal” gun owners, and last but not least, forcing you to submit to a psychological examination by a government-appointed psychiatrist. Their choice, their doctors.
See where this is going? I do! I am not sure if this is a yearly exam, or what individuals can request or impose this examination on you. An unfriendly neighbor, perhaps, or a liberal Democrat who does not subscribe to your conservative voice or views. Another form of “cancel culture.” The possibilities are endless.
That being said, Ms. Chambers, I suggest you examine the root causes of gun violence and school shootings, in reference to new gun laws. Those would fall into the category of mental health, criminal activists, and troubled youth, with no parental guidance, to mention a few. I choose not to bring up the past school shootings by name and perpetrators, as we know who they are, and their mental stability, as well as their lack of parental influence as to correct social behavior. Correct these problems, and the results will become glaringly evident as a productive trend toward solving this dilemma.
(Note: No sooner do I make my assertions about psychological exams than I read in The Westerly Sun an article that Connecticut is looking to expand the law on who can “jump on the bandwagon” as to who has input to your gun rights. How about your lawn care guy, trash man, paper boy, mailman, dentist or proctologist?)
Walter Sheldon Jr.