Guns and Children
To the Editor:
In “Is Your Child a Split Second From Disaster?” (Personal Health, Aug. 1), Jane E. Brody shows that she is not in touch with reality when she suggests that all guns be stored locked, unloaded and separately from locked ammunition.
When a robber breaks in, the homeowner perceives that he needs to quickly grab his loaded gun from an easy-to-reach unlocked drawer and confront the intruder.
An effective measure to ensure children’s safety around household guns is to implant a fingerprint chip in the trigger. The gun will not fire unless the print of the index finger that pulls the trigger matches that of the embedded chip. This measure also renders all stolen guns useless.
Fu-Tin Man
Mechanicsburg, Pa.
•
To the Editor:
Re “Is Your Child a Split Second From Disaster?”: I feel strongly that parents should be aware that by asking if there are guns in the homes where their children play, they could prevent a tragedy that I had to endure. Seven years ago, my baby sitter’s son accidentally shot and killed my 3-year-old son, Markie, with an unlocked gun he found in a closet. I cannot stress this enough: Had I asked this crucial question, he might still be alive.
Sonya Barge
Ballwin, Mo.
•
To the Editor:
I found “Is Your Child a Split Second From Disaster?” misleading, if not intellectually dishonest, written as if there had been a pandemic of accidents involving firearms and children. In fact, for all children under 10, there are about 20 deaths by firearm accident in the United States each year, according to federal statistics.
While each child’s death is its own tragedy (I speak as the father of toddlers), firearms represent a tiny fraction of almost 3,000 children under 10 who die by accidents in the United States. The writer chose to emphasize a statistically infrequent but politically inflammatory cause of injury rather than many far more common, and therefore, more preventable, causes of injury and death.
Brian Villmoare
Tempe, Ariz.
•
To the Editor:
Re “Is Your Child a Split Second From Disaster?”: With the exception of no guns in any household, the suggestions in Jane E. Brody’s column are exactly what the National Rifle Association has been preaching for years: don’t touch it, and call a responsible adult.
The N.R.A. calls it the Eddie the Eagle program, and it is taught in the more progressive elementary schools. As a police officer, now retired, who raised children around firearms, my concern was never their inquisitive minds and hands, but those of their friends. That room was simply off limits, and those directions were always respected. Irresponsible adults breed irresponsible children.
Thomas Vasti
Bronx, N.Y.
•
To the Editor:
Re “Is Your Child a Split Second From Disaster?”: Jane E. Brody writes, “If it were up to me, there would be no guns in any household with children under 18. Better yet, no guns in any household.” I share her antipathy to guns, and I would always vote for gun control. But I’m glad it isn’t up to her. In a democracy, decisions about gun control must be made by the people through their elected representatives, not by ideologues who seek to redefine a political issue as a health issue.
Felicia Nimue Ackerman
Providence, R.I.
•
To the Editor:
Jane E. Brody’s column claiming that people should store their guns locked and unloaded is dangerous advice and will lead to more deaths (“Is Your Child a Split Second from Disaster?”).
Her discussion focuses on accidental gun deaths in the home, but 85 percent of the fatality number she misleadingly points to involve homicides. Surely a concern, but locking up guns in law-abiding homes is unrelated to stopping drug gangs from murdering one another.
Despite her claim, adult males with criminal records and histories of alcoholism or drugs are the ones firing the guns that accidentally kill most young children.
Gun locks won’t stop adult criminals from firing their own guns, but they will prevent law-abiding citizens from defending themselves.
John R. Lott Jr.
Binghamton, N.Y
If only all Anti's had this level of intelligence.