Taking Steps to Reduce Gun Violence

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/opinion/las-vegas-gun-violence.html

Version 0 of 1.

To the Editor:

Re “Repeal the Second Amendment” (column, nytimes.com, Oct. 5):

Politics is the art of the possible, and Bret Stephens’s suggestion of repeal is not possible. However, it may be possible to replace the Second Amendment in a way that clarifies both the right of Americans to own guns and the powers of the government to regulate that right. It could read as follows:

“The right of individuals to keep and bear arms consistent with the purpose of self-defense shall not be infringed. Congress and the states shall have the power to regulate the possession, ownership, sale, production and transportation of arms and ammunition, provided that such regulations do not infringe the right of individuals to keep and bear arms consistent with the purpose of self-defense.”

Advocates of gun control would support this amendment because it clarifies that the government has authority to regulate gun ownership. Advocates of gun owners’ rights might support the amendment because it enshrines their right to own guns for self-defense.

If we can get both groups on board, we can make this happen, and we can begin the work of making America safer.

DENNIS CANFIELDWESTERN SPRINGS, ILL.

To the Editor:

Bret Stephens asserts that the National Rifle Association has donated a “paltry” $3,533,294 to all current members of Congress since 1998, citing a chart published in The Washington Post. But that chart counts only direct contributions, and therefore does not include money that the N.R.A. has spent on behalf of specific candidates.

As The Times has reported, the N.R.A. has spent more than $7 million on behalf of a single senator (John McCain) over his career. The Los Angeles Times reports that the N.R.A. spent $54.4 million on all political campaigns in the 2016 election cycle.

Mr. Stephens is correct that the N.R.A.’s influence is not limited to the money it spends on behalf of politicians. But he’s wrong to suggest that the N.R.A.’s political spending is “paltry” — and that it doesn’t make a difference. It does.

DANIEL LERMAN, WASHINGTON

To the Editor:

When it was reported that the Las Vegas shooter had multiple guns acquired legally, one thought came to mind. There should be a national database of gun sales so that when a person goes to buy a gun, he cannot take possession of it until the database is viewed.

Obviously, criteria that raise a red flag would have to be established — number purchased over a period of time, type of guns, etc. (I leave this to the experts.) I know that such a database would not prevent these atrocities completely, but I think it would make them harder to carry out.

SAUL EISENSTAT, CARMEL, CALIF.

To the Editor:

In all the news coverage of the Las Vegas shooting, where is any footage from the hotel’s own security cameras to confirm the single-shooter theory? If this were a teenager robbing a corner store, the television and the internet would be blasting as many videos from surveillance cameras as possible.

STEFAN SALINAS, SAN FRANCISCO