More guns do make us safer
Re: Matty Park’s Nov. 18 letter, “More guns do not make us safer”:
Did you see the videos? Did you follow the trial? The trial demonstrated that Kyle Rittenhouse legally owned the gun and did not illegally cross state lines.
This was a clear case of self-defense. Rittenhouse was being chased. When he fell, one person was going to hit him with a skateboard, which, if it hit him in the head could have caused brain damage or even death. Another man, who pointed a gun two feet away, was a felon (why did he even have a gun?). The other man tried to grab Rittenhouse’s gun. He fired in self-defense. All three “victims” had criminal records. He was protecting another person’s property when he was chased. Rioting, looting, and mayhem were going on in this area.
Now, about guns. It was not an assault rifle. Period. If you want accurate gun stats, read John Lott, Jr.’s book “More Guns Less Crime.” The gun industry does not promote this statement. Statistics prove it. Statistics show that most crime occurs in states that have lots of “gun free zones.” (New York, California, Chicago, etc.) Criminals target these areas because they know they probably won’t encounter a person with a gun.
As to why guns are so popular, here’s my list:
“Defunding” the police.
Release of criminals from jail.
Reduce police ability to enforce the law.
Threaten to take guns away.
Fail to prosecute criminals.
These are some of the main reasons we have over 10 million first-time gun owners in the last two years, with more than 40% of these being women. In my opinion, more guns make us safer. Statistics prove it.
Marty Ryzak, Newbury Park
Facts don’t back conception belief
Re: Teresa Schultz’s Nov. 29 letter, “Reach out to mothers-to-be”:
Ms. Schultz states that “I’m sure most intelligent people know that science has proven life begins at conception. A heartbeat means there is life. To stop a heartbeat means that a life has been taken ... it’s that simple.”
I believe Ms. Schultz, who did not include any medical qualifications beside her name, is unaware of the facts herself. The term “fetal heartbeat” is a misnomer and is misunderstood and misused. Science has proved that “what we are really detecting is a grouping of (embryonic) cells that are initiating some electrical activity. In no way is this detecting a functional cardiovascular system or a functional heart,” says Dr. J. Kerns, OB-GYN, UCSF.
People who believe that life begins at conception are merely stating their own (often religious-based) opinion and not scientific facts.
It’s that simple.
Penelope Burley, Santa Rosa Valley
This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: Letters: Defending Rittenhouse's defense; misconception about conception