Letters: Don't use Norway to limit guns

I am strongly opposed to the editorial concerning the magazine capacity of firearms ["There's no reason for 30-round clips," Aug. 4]. The magazine ban cited by Newsday existed from 1994 to 2004 and was a resounding failure. Nevertheless, the proponents of the ban want to resurrect it and give it another try.

This reminds me of a remark attributed to Albert Einstein. The good professor suggested that the true definition of insanity was to conduct the same experiment over and over again, hoping for a different result. I fear that the editorial board at Newsday may be suffering from this type of disorder.

James G. Collins, Floral Park

Editor's note: The writer is the Long Island director of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association.
 

On the surface, this editorial's argument would seem logical. I imagine this is why the idea has been embraced by the uninformed public, media and congressional representatives. In reality, it is a naive perspective.

If 30-round ammunition magazines were to be banned on the federal level (they are already illegal in New York), the effect would be the same as most other gun-control laws, and that would be that only the bad guys would have them.

However, and more to the point, the reality is that if an individual intent on mayhem were to have three 10-round magazines instead of one 30-round magazine, the destruction would be identical. The practiced hand can dump an empty magazine and replace it with a new one in mere seconds.

This is where an uninformed media can mislead the public into thinking that a magazine ban would be effective. We do not need more gun control laws. We have enough of those. We only need to enforce them.

Ray Dawson, Huntington
 

It has been reported that the police in Norway don't routinely carry guns. So a madman with a single-shot rifle could commit mass murder before the police would be able to stop him, even if they were already on the scene. There was an off-duty police officer on the scene of the murders, but apparently he was unarmed and therefore powerless to stop the carnage.

Once again, Newsday uses a tragedy as an excuse to advance its anti-Second Amendment agenda. How about this: Give the public unfettered access to your editorial page to publish diverse opinions. Oh, I forgot, the First Amendment gives you the right to say whatever you want.

Bruce Markowitz, Valley Stream