Post guards

Dear Editor,

I'm not a gun guy. I had a .22 when I was a teenager, but hunting wasn't my thing. I was too lazy I guess. So I sold the .22 and except for some pheasant hunting when I was in my '20s, haven't fired a gun since.

I'm telling you all this because -- although I'm not a hunter and I don't own a gun -- I support the National Rifle Association and the right for Americans to own and use guns.

I'm speaking out about my support of gun ownership and gun use today because of the horrible tragedy in Connecticut. After a terrible thing like that happens, there are some among us who believe that guns should be controlled, if not banned.

I sympathize with those who feel that way because I know they're morally motivated: they want the killing to stop.

I do too, but banning guns isn't the way to do it. The problem is that prohibiting the manufacture and sale of guns in the United States wouldn't stop killers from getting guns made in foreign lands, nor would it stop the killers from using other methods to take lives, such as attacks with fertilizer-sparked bombs or other forms of explosives.

Despite the dangers, it looks to me like the only way to stop the crazies from killing is to arm guards in schools and other vulnerable public places with weapons of sufficient firepower to blow away insane intruders.

I know that's scary, but we must take action to stop these senseless attacks. We are losing too many good, innocent men, women and children. We must be ready, with armed and ready law enforcement, when the next psycho tries to go on a killing spree.

Respectfully submitted,

Gene O. Morris,

McCook, Nebraska