I could not believe what I read in last Sunday’s Globe about New Hampshire police chiefs’ plan to hold a gun raffle (New England in brief). In light of what happened in Newtown, Conn., and all of the controversy over gun control, how could the New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police go ahead with a May RAFFLE that would include several semiautomatic weapons?
It doesn’t matter that the raffle was organized before the Newtown shootings. We should not put more guns in the hands of people who really do not need them.
Comments
The scary part is these clowns topped the test! What a joke these clowns are.
You are entitled to your opinion, what would you do about Smith and Wesson in Springfield? There are several gun companies in Ma, should they all close down, stop selling guns? The auction is for guns made in NH, by Ruger and Sig Sauer. From a quick look at the list, most are semi auto, I saw a few bolt action rifles. You seem to have been mislead by news media to have an over reaction to the AR-15 rifles that are part of the auction. Yes, there are more than 1 AR, the story you read didn't really go in depth, something you should consider when you decide where to get your news. Go google and find out how few people are actually shot by the Ar rifle. There are millions of new guns sold each year, why do you think these 31 guns should be destroyed? Are you shocked that law enforcement chiefs would hold the opinion that guns are not the problem, and they don't have a problem with people owning guns? That they have a different opinion that you, even with their experience as law enforcement officials? You should consider that their are many parts of the country with very different views on weapons than in Ma, including NH. You state this is horrible because of the recent tragedy in conn, but that seems like an emotional response, not a fact based response. Your opinion seems to be formed by a lack of information about guns and responsible gun owners. I would suggest you take the steps to learn more about them, including taking a class to learn about firearms and firearm safety.
Over and over we hear the statement about "People who do not NEED them". Strange, it is called the "Bill of Rights" not the "Bill of Needs". Maybe we should revamp and rename it, then when someone wants to write a comment, they will have to demonstrate a "need" to write it. How about, when the police want to search your home, belongings, person, you can say you will have to demonstrate a "need" not to be searched. Or, if you are ever in court, you will have to prove a "need" not to incriminate yourself.
So, how could the PC's in NH do it? Simple, this is the United States, we are supposed to be a FREE people, get it? FREE. Rights are not suspended "in light" of events.