To the Editor:

Re “The Killing Chain,” by David Brooks (column, March 26):

The current gun control debate is about mass shootings, not “crime.”

Gun control laws may not stop one drug dealer from shooting another, but a ban on automatic weapons and large-capacity magazines could cut the death toll in a mass shooting. Universal background checks, mental health restrictions and requirements for the use of biometric software in guns that prevents anyone but the legal owner from firing the weapon, to name a few common-sense gun control measures, could all reduce the chance of another Newtown.

DAVID RAWSON

Brooklyn, March 26, 2013





To the Editor:

David Brooks disdains gun controls with the tired argument that since controls in the past have not stopped killing, then let’s forget about future controls. But the controls of the past have been flimsy. Gun shows are exempt from most regulations; people in more regulated places (Chicago) can drive a few miles to less regulated places; and the few regulations in place have been too often ignored by gun sellers and not enforced by the authorities. And even legitimately bought guns end up in dangerous hands, or lie within the reach of children or are used to kill a family member by accident or design.

Logic dictates that if weak controls aren’t working, adopt stronger ones. Ignoring the problem is not the solution.

SHELBY YASTROW

Scottsdale, Ariz., March 26, 2013





To the Editor:

David Brooks is wrong in arguing that focusing on gun acquisition by dangerous people has not worked. A comparison among states proves it.