To control or not control guns in a free society

I fail to see how Maj. Ray Colgan of the Prince William County police force can say: "If you can say something good came out of Virginia Tech, preparedness was it." ["Rifle jammed during shooting," Metro, Dec. 10] Sure, preparedness helped keep hundreds of students away from the shooter at Northern Virginia Community College's Woodbridge campus last week, but the bottom line is: Had his gun not jammed, at least one person likely would have been shot -- the poor teacher. No matter how fast a place can be locked down, once an armed person intends to cause harm, murder and mayhem are likely to ensue. A lockdown is as good as closing the barn door after the horse has gotten out.

The only good thing that could come from the Virginia Tech tragedy is gun control legislation that keeps guns out of the hands of the public. Enough is enough.

Lisa Szymanski, Vienna

--

Regarding E.J. Dionne Jr.'s comments on the poll of National Rifle Association members and other gun owners ["Beyond the NRA's absolutism," op-ed, Dec. 10]: I think rephrasing the poll statements that Mr. Dionne noted would produce opposite results.

For example, concerning the Tiarht amendment: If the statement had been, "The federal government should keep a permanent record of all gun-purchase background checks, thereby creating a national gun registry," 99 percent of respondents would have disagreed.

The actual poll statement relating to Tiahrt was, "The federal government should not restrict the police's ability to access, use, and share data that helps them enforce federal, state and local gun laws." Mr. Dionne reported that among NRA members, 69 percent agreed. The catch-22 in this statement is that "data" refers only to that information that the government can legally collect and keep.

Sure, the feds should not stonewall other agencies. But "hell no" to any de facto gun registration scheme.

Jay Bute, Seabrook, Tex.