Rick Notkin: New Maine gun law wouldn't have prevented shootings

To The Daily Sun,

The headline in The Sun April 30, 'NH lone New England state without background checks for gun purchases,' was a lie and disinformation.

How do I know? Note in the second paragraph: "background checks ... [are] federal law and required in all states." The new law in Maine pertained to private sales.

What truths did readers learn after many column-inches? Very little.

These laws that were passed after a recent shooting in Maine would not have prevented that shooting. This is typical of anti-rights groups and politicians who feel the need to “do something.”

Time after time, laws are proposed and frequently passed which, were they in place, would not have prevented the shooting du jour.

The piece continues by noting that the 72-hour waiting period does not trample anybody’s rights. No. What if you had to wait 72-hours before posting on Facebook? OK, that can be useful. What if your ex-partner is stalking you and you want to be able to protect yourself? Too bad. See you in three days.

The Bill of Rights is supposed to restrict what government can do to the people. So the right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed" seems pretty clear to me. How about to you?

I’m sorry that in her letter on April Janet Simmons is disappointed that Israel didn’t use more eco-friendly munitions in their self-defense efforts. Would she have been happier if Israel had used small arms and knives like Hamas and their supporters used on Oct. 7?

I feel badly regarding the naivety of Georgina Lambert's letter from May 4. Does she know what Hamas and the Palestinian Liberation Organization and Islamic jihad mean by “from the river to the sea”? They mean a one-state solution with no Jews. Check their charter and listen to their speeches.

Rick Notkin

Gilford