Michael Swanson’s letter (Sept. 15 issue of the Daily) contains several irrational pro-gun assertions.

He first asserts that universal gun registration is a bad idea by invoking the specter of government totalitarianism.

Yet his own position provides no solution for this scary possibility, either — not unless he thinks the average U.S. citizen should have the universal right to own ANY weapon: conventional, precision-guided, chemical, biological or nuclear.

It is absolutely illogical to fear a bloodthirsty dictator wielding the U.S. military (easily the most powerful the world has ever known) and concede advantages as overwhelming as the above to the dictator.

Furthermore, this country is not based upon the notion that government responds to the will of the people because of guns.

This was not the way our system was designed (elections, extensive checks and balances, etc. serve this purpose).

Mr. Swanson seems to fear that firearms are the only thing standing between us and the slippery slope of oblivion, which is an absurd and dangerous notion.

He also derides the Brady Law’s waiting period stipulations, while conveniently ignoring its other provision: background checks.

By Justice Department estimates (CNN), this provision has prevented over 250,000 felons from purchasing guns since the law was enacted.

This fact has been ignored recently by the NRA in its campaign to push for more “enforcement” (prosecutions) rather than more gun control legislation — as though existing laws are languishing ineffective thanks to federal incompetence.

This campaign also ignores the fact (per the Justice Department) that most prosecutions are handled locally.

To be sure, prosecutions could always increase. But this would not be close to a final solution.

We need more legislation as well as an increased prosecution rate. There is no reason this has to be an “either-or” situation.

Since guns do not magically appear on the streets (rather, the majority are stolen from “legal” owners), making it more difficult to legally obtain guns will reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals, period.

Further, there are obvious steps we can take to limit other routes for guns to reach criminals (such as background checks at gun shows).

Considering the fact that the United States easily has the highest gun murder rate in the world and a handgun murder rate over three times that of its closest competitor, it makes little sense to oppose new gun control legislation on the grounds Mr. Swanson puts forth.

---

Jonathan Williams

Senior

Electrical engineering