Debating gun control in Tucson's wake

Arizona last summer removed all of its "concealed carry" permit rules. In 47 other states, in order to carry a concealed gun, people need a permit that requires some training and some law enforcement oversight. When Arizona removed the permitting requirement, it allowed anyone, even Jared Loughner, to carry a concealed weapon anywhere they want.

The easy "concealed-carry" permits of a state such as Arizona make the proposal by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) even more dangerous to citizens and law enforcement. If passed, Thune's proposed amendment would allow people with concealed carry permits from any state, like Arizona, with no rules, to carry weapons across state lines to places with stricter gun laws like New York. The threat of passage only serves to weaken law enforcement capability and undermine New York's right to determine the specific public safety needs of our citizens and our police officers.

Assemb. Michelle Schimel

(D-Great Neck)

At first I laugh but then cry whenever I read comments in Newsday regarding firearms ["Arizona massacre," News, Jan. 12]. The misinformation is rampant.

New York allows magazines with up to 10 rounds (they are not clips), yet criminals still use magazines with much higher capacities. The ban has not stopped them in New York, and nationwide legislation will not stop criminals from continually getting higher capacity magazines.

I agree that current laws need to be followed and the Arizona gunman should not have gotten a gun. He had charges brought against him for possession of drug paraphernalia, yet none of this information was passed along so that when his National Instant Criminal Background Check went through, there were no red flags. He lied on his documentation, as criminals will do.

Another man commented that "automatics should be controlled." You must have a special federal license for automatic weapons, and then there are restrictions on how you can transport them. Criminals don't follow the law.

As long as a criminal, rapist, home invader, robber, drive-by shooter, etc., has a high-capacity magazine, why should I not be able to defend myself on an even playing field with a legally owned firearm that required paperwork, fees, background checks, interviews, references, and meetings with police officers in order for me to obtain it?

Law-abiding citizens go through a lot to get their licenses and are not the ones that society should be worried about.

Joseph Biondi

Lindenhurst

Regarding "Schumer's gun plan" [News, Jan. 17], I agree with Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) that people such as accused Tucson shooter Jared Loughner, who fail a military drug test or tell military recruiters they have a history of "regular drug use," should be prohibited from buying guns. I agree with his call for President Barack Obama to issue an executive order requiring the military to share recruiting data on drug use with the FBI. This will fill in gaps in the national database that gun dealers are required to check before selling firearms.

The military does not share its recruiting information with other federal law enforcement agencies. If it did, perhaps the attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords would not have taken place.

Susannah Scully

Baldwin

I like Sen. Schumer. I'm a proponent of gun control. However, Sen. Schumer's plan to ban weapons sales to former illegal substance users is ridiculous. Legal alcohol use is behind the majority of violent crimes involving substance use.

I'd like to remind Sen. Schumer that people with histories of addictions are protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act. There is no substantial proof that past illegal drug use will somehow lead individuals to become threats to society at some point in the future.

James A. Seitz

Port Jefferson Station