May 29, 2013 2 min read

My response is directed to the May 15 editorial entitled “Gun control conversation must continue.”

I found this article misleading in a couple areas. While you are correct in stating that the Canonsburg resident arrested on drug and illegal firearm possession in now off the streets, your added association to the need for more gun control is either naive or a considerable reach. They have nothing to do with each other.

The current laws prevailed, law enforcement did their job well and eliminated a criminal from doing more bad things. Drugs and illegal guns go hand-in-hand. More gun controls – including expanding background checks to the very few areas not already controlled – would not have prevented this guy from illegally obtaining firearms.

Also, your statement that “despite that the majority of U.S. citizens support the measure,” referring to expanded background checks is misleading. You are probably referring to the oft liberal media quoted stat that 40 percent of all firearms are transferred without background checks. This stat was developed by a gun-control group and from a very narrow sampling of only a few hundred people.

Before you proceed further down the path of suggesting more gun laws for good citizens to protect themselves and for various sporting activities, you should familiarize yourself with extensive objective studies done by John Lott – an admitted liberal professor. His conclusions are clear … U.S. and worldwide strict gun control laws have little or no impact on violent crime.

Darell Frank

McDonald