In light of the 2 or 3 recent news stories where individuals in Boston, Cincinnatti and elsewhere are being prosecuted for defending themselves against crime (in two cases, for sure, both defendants used guns) I think it highly unlikely that responsible gun owners will rush out to pour their vigilante justice on the city in wake of such a disturbing trend. Unfortunately, people constantly miss the point when discussing the "shootings" that are taking place on a regular basis, especially in our cities. The "crime" itself is a result of a criminal mind that hopes to somehow gain through their violent actions. The "gun" is merely a chosen method for this outlet. I can say with conviction that if a gun were not available, such a CRIMINAL would find another means to do their deed. Please don't play the victim role (again and again) and say the big, bad gun industry is to blame. Alchohol has just as much lobbying power in this country and I personally know more individuals whose lives who have been destroyed through alcholism and drunk driving than a random shooting.

I for one want to go on record that I think we should ban cars because of all of the deaths and serious injuries due to cars allowing drunks to drive them. those darn cars they are evil like guns... Get the picture? put the blame on those who do the crime not the tools they use.

Good afternoon Mr. Hoppe: This morning I had the opportunity to read your May 13, 2008 article “Tyranny of the Gun”. Like you, I am a resident of Indianapolis. Also like you, I am troubled by the recent rash of crimes. As for me, just as for you, some of these incidents have occurred very close to where I live. I suspect for you, any crime is cause for concern whether it involves a gun or not; just as it is causes me concern. Unfortunately, I gained personal experience with the type of crime to which your article spoke when a friend of mine lost his life in a shooting. Often forgotten and overlooked after the headlines have run is the lingering impact on the family resulting from the loss of a father; a son; a spouse. The debate over gun rights has been a controversial topic for generations and I commend you for taking on such a topic in the public forum. I use the term “debate” loosely. So often a discussion on the topic quickly erodes to quips and the bantering of slogans such as “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” in lieu of anything resembling an exchange of ideas and addressing of points raised by the participants. To me, this is unfortunate as it seems to have the effect of raising much emotion on either side of topic while doing little to address the underlying issues. From your article, I surmise you are a proponent of gun control. I too believe it is beneficial to have safeguards in place such as background checks, waiting periods, hand gun licensing procedures, and so forth to provide some measure of safety. I also surmise from your article that you would advocate a significant curtailment in gun owner “rights”. Perhaps even something approaching a complete ban of guns or handguns on those not employed in law enforcement, armed services, or other such professions would be in order. The issue I see in an approach which further abridges gun owner rights is that such legislation typically does little to address underlying issues. It treats a symptom instead of the disease. This has been illustrated time and again throughout our history. For example, when legislation was passed significantly curtailing the sale and distribution of alcohol, it did little to address the concerns over moral decline and drunkenness held by those leading the temperance movement. In fact, one could argue the effect was opposite of that intended when one considers the expansion of organized crime and violence that accompanied the prohibition of alcohol. Legislation proved to have little effectiveness in addressing the underlying issue of concern. In our contemporary society we have prohibitions on drugs of a wide variety. Regardless, the abuse of drugs, legal or illegal, continues in some areas is escalating. This abuse and the vast array of issues stemming from it are persistent and growing problems for our society. Once again, legislation has proven to have limited effectiveness in addressing the underlying issue. I submit legislation further curtailing gun owner rights can be expected to function in a similar manner. Taking guns out of the equation does not address the underlying issue of violence in our community and the willingness of perpetrators to carry violence to extreme degrees. Instead of further curtailing the rights of gun owners, I believe we would be better served by an approach towards addressing the underlying issue of violence. I believe such an approach should include, but not be limited to, significantly stronger sentences for criminal activity involving guns, curtailment of “plea bargain” opportunities, and active cooperation by community citizens with law enforcement in solving and deterring crime in our community. Mr. Hoppe, I would like to hear your thoughts or rebuttal to my comments. In your article, you also state that “It’s high time that gun owners and businesses, as the beneficiaries of constitutional protection and lobbying muscle, took the lead in coming up with initiatives to fight crime in high-risk neighborhoods”. So often it is forgotten that with “rights” come responsibilities. I very much appreciate you including a reminder of the responsibilities we all have as citizens of our community. Gun owners and advocates of gun owner rights can and should take a lead role in combating violence in the high-risk neighborhoods of our community through actively participating in crime prevention programs. Active participation isn’t simply hanging a “Neighborhood Watch” sign on the light post and showing up at the monthly meeting. It goes beyond that towards developing an awareness of the patterns throughout the area. It means speaking up instead of turning a blind eye or deaf ear. It means actively cooperating with authorities in developing leads when a situation develops instead of simply responding to inquiries as to whether or not something was seen or heard. It involves helping to fund crime prevention activity. It means participating in night watch duty rotations. As for myself, I am active in all of these avenues and more. Taking a lead role in fighting violence and crime also encompasses providing a means of deterrence and protection for your family and yourself while working towards curbing violence and crime. Among other things, I exercise my right as a licensed gun owner to be armed whenever in high-risk neighborhoods or situations where I can reasonably expect to be called on to defend my family or myself against violence. It would be irresponsible for me to expect law enforcement to solely shoulder this responsibility for me. I truly appreciate your article Mr. Hoppe and I would truly appreciate your comments on my thoughts. With best regards, Mr. Utterback

What do you propose we as gun owners do to fight crime? David is quick to charge us with the responsibility of crime control in return for enjoying a constitutional right. This is akin to requiring healthcare providers to reduce drug abuse. Doctors are given the right to practice medicine and administer controlled substances. Should they be liable for chasing down drug dealers downtown? I think not. Fight the crime not the tools.

What's everyone getting worked up about? David Hoppe is a second-rate hack. Nobody give a shit what he has to say. He's only important in his own mind.

I say everyone with a prior criminal record be given a six inch knife and a baseball bat. We don't need any more gun deaths in this city. The guns are the problem, not the murders. I cannot stand the fact that people can so easily kill people with guns. Where is the sport, effort, or skill in that? The world was so much better when killing was up close and personal.

Worried about violent crime ? Why blame inanimate objects? Why not blame the people that break laws? Instead of worrying about a "gunshow loophole",.... why not turn some attention to the loopholes criminals use - pre-trial diversion, plea bargaining and early paroles? Law abiding citizens should not be punished or lose any rights based on the acts committed by those who do not obey laws. Do you believe cars cause drunk driving ? Should all drivers be punished for what a few drunk drivers do ? To deny or diminish a right of the whole of the American people based on the actions of criminals, insane people or misbehaving maladjusted teens,.... may be the greatest crime of all.

There is a small town in Georgia, where it is required by law to have a firearm. Their crime rate is the lowest in the nation. What I would suggest doing is rather simple, increase the penalties for violent crime. Do away with parole and probation. Make those behind bars for non violent crimes actually have to work, and teach them a trade- it worked before why not again? Make the prisoners grow their own food, and have them make things to sell to offset their cost. Get rid of their TVs and ESPECIALLY cable TV. Make the punishment fit the crime instead of coddling these "people". The biggest thing to do is to let people protect their loved ones and property without fear of reprisal, be it civil suits or an overzealous prosecutor.

I am pleased that there are so many responsible gun owners out there. Heck, I used to be one myself. However, the point Mr. Hoppe seems to be making is that 3/4 / 75% / 3 out of 4 homicides in this city, as of the first part of May, have been gun-related. I know none of you responsible, trained, educated gun owners did any of these shootings. The question remains -- What, EXACTLY, do YOU recommend we do to drive down this insane rate of killing? The Mayor and the Public Safety Czar evidently don't have any good ideas. How about YOU chipping in with something we can use instead of the same old tired rhetoric provided to you by the NRA.

Ahhhh yes.....another person who thinks guns are evil. Take away guns, and all crime will stop. Wake up and smell the roses, guy......People kill people - guns just provide a quicker and more efficient way of doing it. Personally, I think any adult who does not have a criminal record should be allowed to possess and carry a firearm, provided that he/she has taken a firearm safety course. I was taught to shoot, and taught firearm safety when I was 5 years old. I was taught that a gun is NOT a toy. Responsible gun owenership is not the cause of the firearm deaths that we see in the papers.

I see how it works; the gun forces the person to commit a crime. Yes, we all see it. The gun, using space-age mind-control techniques and devices cause crime by making the criminal use it for evil. Gun bans work, too. When a gun ban takes place, every criminal decides, "Hey, the law says I can't use this, so let me turn this in. After all, I respect the law!" Maybe we should make it illegal to shoot people in non-self-defense scenarios. Oh wait, it IS. So why do these criminals do it? Because they have NO respect for the law. Not only is it ignorant, but downright foolish, to think that criminals will abide by laws. They don't; that's what makes them criminals. It's not unusual to see the ignorance of anti-gunners spout out this type of propaganda. They're usually the types of people who cry out for "criminal rights", the kinds of people who have made it possible for people on death row to have a better chance at an organ transplant than a dying child. Put a sign on your door that says, "I support gun control. This is a gun-free household. We don't believe in self-defense." Then after one year, let us see how you are doing, assuming you survived the assaults and home invasions. Nobody looks at a knife and sees a slasher. Nobody looks at a computer and sees a hacker. Nobody looks at a lighter and sees an arsonist. Only the ignorant look upon a gun and immediately think "criminal". Guns are part of America, and if you don't like American tradition, you're welcome to go and move to England or Australia. They have gun bans there, gun bans that have only allowed crime to rise. Even the treasonous Brady Campaign's own "grades" on states have shown that gun control leads to more violent crime. Just think from a criminal's point of view. The man on the left is guaranteed to be unarmed. The man on the right could be armed. Who do you mug? The agenda of anti-gunners is truly a testament to the word "treason". To put the safety and well-being of criminals above the safety of law-abiding citizens is treason and traitorous. For shame!

David? Whay are you so afraid to put the blame where it belongs -- on the goblins that have taken your city hostage. How do you plan to protect yourself from them? 911?

If the light saber was invented and was truely better than a clumsy blaster than you'd be blaming light sabers instead of guns. Its all about the people commiting these crimes. Maybe if people would just get along then people would have better things to write about. guns are not evil, people are.

Well, we could lock up the criminal. That would be a good start. Doesn't matter if you kill someone with a gun or a crowbar. The crime is the same. Go to jail for life, no parole. Solitary. No tv. Bread and water.

and I am absolutely responsible for anything I do with a firearm. It's a shame you cannot bring yourself to place blame squarely on the criminals for their crimes rather than pawn responsibility off on an inanimate object just for your own political agenda. It's a real shame.