The topic of legal firearm ownership and their responsible usage is admittedly complex, and it’s often discussed in highly emotional terms. I’d like to present one aspect for the consideration of ADN readers.
Let’s speculate that someone in a given family group decides to repeatedly engage in impaired driving, or even to internationally commit an act of vehicular homicide. Of course that individual should expect to suffer the lawful consequences of that act. If one of the consequences is the loss of their driving privileges, shouldn’t the remainder of the family group have to surrender their vehicles in case the individual should ever gain access to them and choose to drive regardless?
If your answer is “of course not,” then why should responsible firearm owners and legal users of those weapons be subject to punishment for the irresponsible act of another?
— Richard Garner
Anchorage
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.