Letter to the editor

I must respond to the recent op ed (11/22) expressed by Blaine Blackstone concerning gun laws. Mr. Blackstone states that 20 years ago we had the same laws, but we didn’t have these mass shootings and he addresses what he thinks has changed. I’ve wondered the same thing. Having grown up in Thompson Falls, I saw many a truck with a gun rack visible in the back window. I didn’t give it a second thought as the town had numerous hunters and ranchers who wanted a gun handy. My father, Doc Rosdahl, loaded his own bullets and had a few rifles and a shotgun arrayed in a rack in the workshop.

What changed? Sandy Hook changed me. On December 14, 6 years ago, when 20 first and second graders and six teachers were shot in a space of 4 minutes, their little bodies blown to pieces, I woke to the reality that I had a second grade grandson and a daughter that was a second grade teacher and that could be them. As a parent and grandparent, it was time for me to take action.

What changed nationally? Primarily fear – stoked by the NRA – that you need a gun for your personal protection, and the bigger the arsenal and the more powerful, the better. Fear – that your individuality, your power and respect, depend on owning this arsenal. All marketing measures promoted by the lobbying arm of the NRA to increase gun sales.

Mr. Blackstone and I are not in agreement that the mass shootings are generated by mental health issues. Other western democracies have the same rate of mental health illness that the U.S. has, but they don’t have the same rate of gun violence. He places blame on video games and poor parenting. I feel that these are contributors, but I would like to see a more immediate solution. The issue is access to guns by dangerous people – yes, those with mental illness AND by domestic abusers AND by violent people – most of whom are not mentally ill. The one most significant factor that shooters have in common is that they are white men – not mental illness. Violent dangerous people should not own weapons capable of killing, much less mass killing. Law enforcement should be authorized to take guns away from them, at least until there has been a significant change in their mental state. Blame the gun? Most certainly. They weren’t going to wound or kill 500 people (RE: Las Vegas) with sling shots. Guns are very effective at killing – that’s why they are chosen.

With regard to the Thousand Oaks shooting in which the bar had a No Fire Arms policy, there are many factors to consider and every situation is different. Nevertheless, it makes sense to me that bars are not a place for people to be handling guns. The chance of accidents, arguments and bad judgment fueled by alcohol are inevitable. Who is the good guy with the gun and who is the bad guy? The latest news is that the policeman was shot by friendly fire. The point is, more guns are not the answer. 2016-17 FBI statistics stated that in 250 active shooter incidents, seven were stopped by armed civilians and 22 were stopped by unarmed civilians. The statistics bear out that it is rare that a shooter is taken out by another shooter.

I am passionate about firearms too! Yes, we need to enforce the existing laws. Yes, background checks should be enforced and include gun shows and online sales. Yes, we need red flag laws that give law enforcement the power to take guns away from mentally ill with dangerous tendencies, and /or domestic abusers. And, yes, military grade weapons should be illegal. I am a member of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, which is similar to the original MADD, Moms Against Drunk Drivers. We are dedicated to turning this gun crazy country around, enforcing the existing laws and adding new ones when needed. Look for me and other moms at the state Legislature in January.

Lynne Dickman, Missoula,

Retired Forest Service geologist and former Miss Sanders County