Re "Gun Profits for Votes: It's Enough to Make You Sick," Commentary, Sept. 10: Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) asserts, "The percentage of banned assault weapons used in crimes is down by nearly two-thirds since 1994." I would be more impressed if violent crimes were down by two-thirds since the ill-conceived "assault weapons ban" was implemented in 1994. That is not the case. There is no statistic to support the position that this ban has done anything to affect the number of violent crimes. Criminals will obtain whatever weapons are at their disposal to carry out their misdeeds.
What makes me sick, Sen. Feinstein, is career politicians such as you, both Democrats and Republicans, who use rhetoric, illogical arguments and lies to pander to the special interest groups that put you into office and on whom you depend to continue your life on the public dole.
Re "Assault Weapons Ban Was Useless Anyway," Commentary, Sept. 10: How can anyone take seriously the comments made by John Lott urging the expiration of the assault weapons ban? He wrote a book titled "More Guns, Less Crime." I'm just picturing us all packing our lunch and our Uzis as we trot off to work or school in the morning.
John A. Sussman
Thank you, Congress, for letting the federal ban on assault weapons expire. Now Americans again have the same freedom that Iraqi citizens have enjoyed since the fall of Saddam Hussein: the freedom to possess military-style assault weapons. But somehow, looking at the chaos in Iraq, I don't feel a whole lot safer
Your Sept. 13 editorial, "Blood on the NRA's Hands," was completely illogical. You concede that the federal law did not prevent the tragic death of Evan Foster, but then state, " ... by that logic legislators should drop laws against driving drunk.... " That is wrong. Banning guns to prevent crime would be analogous to banning alcohol to prevent drunk driving, and I think we tried that once before and created a nation of criminals.