Lynn Willis’s question in his May 22 letter needs answering. He compared assault rifle use to tobacco use. He pointed out that the tobacco industry was subjected to “strict liability” when it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that using tobacco leads to serious harm and public expense.
Then he indicated that assault rifles are specifically designed for killing human beings, thus also leading to serious harm and public expense.
Then he asked the question: Should our response to the assault rifle industry be any different than it is to the tobacco industry? The answer is yes, it should be different, because 24.6 million law-abiding U.S. citizens owned assault rifles in 2021, very few of which have been used unlawfully or to cause harm to a human being.
Of the 13,922 U.S. homicides in 2019, only 2.6% were by assault rifles. And according to the National Institute of Justice (2022), 77.2% of mass shootings were committed with handguns and only 25.1% with assault rifles. Sounds like Willis should be focused on handguns.
Finally, Willis changed the subject and stated, “the constitutional right to bear arms is not superior to the right to peacefully assemble.” Maybe, but it should definitely be superior to the right to non-peacefully assemble — think self-defense.
— Jim Lieb
Palmer
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.