Almost nine years ago, we had a school shooting at Columbia High School in East Greenbush. One person was shot, a teacher coming to help the assistant principal who had tackled the perpetrator. This is such a different outcome than Sandy Hook Elementary School, and the question is why.
The answer is not that difficult to figure out. The student at Columbia had a shotgun, not a semiautomatic rifle. He could not spray a classroom with bullets, one every second. The difference is one person wounded vs. 26 dead. Fewer dead people, especially fewer dead children — isn't this the reason to ban assault weapons?
The person with that shotgun should not have had it, and that's a different issue. We need more mental health help, especially for young adults. But at least he did not have a semiautomatic weapon with 30-round magazines. Both of these have no place on the streets of our country. If we really want to keep to the Second Amendment, which could only regard muskets (the firearms available at the time), maybe we should say having a musket is all that's guaranteed. I know this idea sounds extremely unreasonable, but why is the other extreme, that any gun is permissible, OK?
We are allowing ourselves to be bullied by the gun lobby, especially the National Rifle Association. A plethora of anti-bullying programs exists in our schools, and we are trying to teach our children not to bully and how to stand up to bullies. However, our leaders have not yet stood up to the bullies. We cannot allow bullies to decide what we should be doing.
Tell your elected representatives that you want sensible laws on guns.
Linda G. Jones
Rensselaer