Go after the terrorists, not my rights
The original assault-weapons ban was a feel-good, do-nothing law that had absolutely no effect on crime rates (according to FBI analysis) [“No more excuses: Ban assault-style weapons,” Opinion, June 16]. That is because the ban went after cosmetic features of a rifle: folding stock, pistol grip, detachable magazine, bayonet lug, flash suppressor.
If a particular model of firearm had three of those naughty features, it was banned. The manufacturers learned to design around the law and the exact same firearm became legal if the folding stock was turned into a thumbhole stock or if the bayonet lug was ground off or if the flash suppressor was removed.
These rifles were bought and sold legally during the ban, and all the ban did was drive up both the demand and the prices for these rifles.
How to submit a letter
Letters to the editor are an important part of the Opinion section. Our readers share a wide range of perspectives on current issues.
Interested in writing a letter? Submit at this link or write to letters@seattletimes.com.
Regular-capacity magazines (30 rounds) were also driven up in price and millions were sold before the ban went into effect. Even during the ban, I could buy and sell the magazines, as there was no way to track when they were made (pre-ban or post-ban).
The whole thing was a legislative exercise in stupidity and worthless lawmaking.
How about Congress get on the stick and tell the executive branch to pursue the war on terror properly: Wage war on the Islamic State and arrest anyone in the U.S. who is a suspected terrorist. Don’t assault my constitutional rights just because someone thinks we need to do something in response to a terror attack in the U.S.
Go after the terrorists, not my rights.
George Townsend, North Bend
Understanding Islam
Once more we experienced a sad day when Omar Mateen indiscriminately killed 49 people and wounded more than 50 more in Orlando. My thoughts and prayers are with all those affected by this senseless and barbaric atrocity. I am filled with sadness and anger at the loss of innocent lives taken in the name of Islam.
As a Muslim, I wholeheartedly condemn this cowardly act. The Quran unequivocally states, “Whosoever killed a person … it shall be as if he had killed all mankind” (5:33). This attack was not only utterly inhumane but also wholly un-Islamic. Islam and the Quran do not, in any shape or form, call for the killing of homosexuals, and such vigilantism is nothing short of terrorism and is condemnable as such.
And once more we saw the double standards from media. This time the media also failed to do its job by telling the story right. It was the same media that published the headlines “A great American boxer Muhammad Ali died” but a week later, their headlines were, “A Muslim terrorist killed 50 people.” We should judge Islam by the extraordinary life of Muhammad Ali that he spent and not judge the entire religion with the act of one person who wasn’t even practicing true Islam.
Sheheryar Ahmad, Lynnwood
Homophobia and self-hatred
Investigations so far have revealed no connections between Omar Mateen and terrorist groups. They have, however, turned up quite a few connections with gay ones.
This could suggest an interest with homosexuality that is quite compatible with his known homophobia.
Homophobia, as I stated in my 1987 book on gay identity, is the fear that one’s own homosexual feelings will be found out.
This phenomenon, often called “self-hatred,” is well described in scientific literature. Men especially go to extraordinary lengths to hide their failure to “internalize the norm” and to prove to others their masculinity and heterosexuality. It is a very frequent cause of teenage suicides and domestic violence as well as hate crimes.
Homophobia, like racism, runs very deep in our society. It is always a mistake to overlook the social costs of homophobia and religious prohibitions.
Freud wrote about the consequences of sexual repression. In “The Interpretation of Dreams,” He quoted from Vergil, “Si flectere supremos nequeo, Acheronta movebo.” (“If I cannot bend the powers of heaven, I will raise the gates of hell.”)
William DuBay, Poulsbo
Ideas from a gun owner
As a gun owner and fan of the Second Amendment, there are definitely things we can do to keep guns away from dangerous people.
I would support a universal gun-safety class, thorough background check and mental-health screening requirement before being able to buy weapons, like assault-style rifles. A minimum waiting period, like the two weeks for people without a concealed-carry license who have to wait to get a pistol, would also be valuable.
I don’t know if I could support a blanket ban on AR-style long rifles, but I don’t own one and I’m not really interested in one anyway, so I don’t really have any skin in the game.
I’m skeptical of increasing requirements for firearms, such as shotguns, hunting rifles or blackpowder guns — and even with pistols and revolvers; sometimes people do legitimately need them for self-defense.
Aaron Kunkler, Seattle
Politicians are a greater threat
Those who bow to the National Rifle Association threaten me far more than those who honor the prophet. My Muslim American friends and their communities are not a danger to me. I know them as compassionate with deep integrity.
The greater danger comes from U.S. politicians who are so servile to the gun lobby they don’t have the courage to ban sales of semi-automatic, paramilitary weapons.
Fred LaMotte, Steilacoom