dear nicole,

(pardon the typing, i type thoughts, facts and brainwaves at a high pace, and was NOT a grammar/journalism major! :->)

i read your column all the time and was very surprised at your gunshow loophole article. i have ALWAYS thought of you as a VERY common sense coulmnist(very rare indeed these days), who reports fact based credible positions. in keeping with your afterthought (which I always love!) I will skip the rhetoric and lead straight to the reason.

a few afterthoughts on it. i will attempt to provide documented links to support my position, not feelings or other speculation, just the facts ma'am.


1) the gunshow loophole is misleading at face value. according to the DOJ,  

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm

80% of all guns used in crimes, like the DC snipers gun, like the columbine gun,  was obtained from 'an illegal source' less than 2% from a flea market or gun show. hell, even pawn shops (which use the current background check), account for 12%. the majority of illegal guns that criminals use are NOT coming from gunshows.




2) criminals, by their very nature ignore all laws. period. hence criminal as a title. all the new laws for gun control are only restrictions on law obiding citizens, and a financial burden to the poor who are already financially restricted in their ability to defend themselves. thus the old, poor, and helpless, who dont have ADT alarms, who dont have bars on their windows, who live in crime ridden neighborhoods, those who are MOST vulnerable to crime, are being priced out of the ability to buy decent firearms to defend themselves.


3) the guns that were used in colombine were illegal from the word go a number of ways.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/518610.stm

http://www.cnn.com/US/9904/29/school.shooting.02/

they were sold to minors. its not only illegal to sell to minors, its illegal for them to attempt to buy a gun! the guy who sold them also had an illegal sawed off shotgun. he obviously didnt care about the law one way or the other, and more laws just makes them all more guilty AFTERWARDS, and will do nothing to prevent anything like this tragedy. nowhere was a gunshow listed in the articles, the gun, like the other 80% of all criminal guns was obtained through other illegal channels, through a friend of a friend.


4) with a quick glance, i cant find a newer link, but this page  http://www.rkba.org/research/stats/ccw  shows the direct correlation between carrying concealed weapons and crime or lack thereof. we are MUCH safer here in WA, with CCW, than california, illinois, DC or NY. All those states have the most VERY RESTRICTIVE gun regulations, which in turn makes unarmed victims out of law obiding citizens. criminals prefer unarmed victims!  while i dont remember her name, i remember the story of one of seattles own doctors murdered in DC last year or so. i simply refuse to go to these places anymore. i stick to the dozen states i am legally allowed to defend myself, as are other law obiding citizens. i am confident i am much safer there.

remember the deputy murdered in coal creek? after the criminal (who also didnt buy THAT gun) took the officers gun, he had a loaded gun in a crowd of people. TWO armed citizens prevented a turkey shoot. one armed man followed him to the place police captured him. imagine that in DC or california where NO ONE but the police and criminals have guns? would other citizens have been killed? little doubt to me it could happen.


gun control in all forms is restrictive on the creator endowed second ammendment. after they gut the second, they will come after your first, then let me see you publicly dress kerlikowski(sp?) down. then the fourth and 'papers please'. gun control ONLY affects law obiding citizens which already are no threat to the safety of others.  pre emptive gun control is like cutting your tongue out when entering a movie theatre because you may yell fire. EVERY country which has introduced gun registration, has come back later to collect them. just because we do not live in the woods anymore, does not mean we have no reason to defend ourselves. the supreme court has stated the police has NO -- well i will just give you the quote-

"... a government and its agents are under no general duty to
provide public services, such as police protection, to any
particular individual citizen..."
-- Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)


i could go one forever, but i honestly think i have given plenty of reason to dispell popular myths concerning guns and the GSL. im sorry for the length nicole, but this is a very important issue in these trying times in america, and i hope you consider, or reconsider your position in support of the GSL...

i would love to get any questions or feedback from you in this matter...


X XXXXXXXX

Seattle.....









"Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples liberty teeth." George Washington

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."  Benjamin Franklin

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined. The great object is that every man be armed and everyone who is able may have a gun."
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense?" Patrick Henry