I sent a letter to the Journal in reply to this article. To date, and no surprise, there have been 0 letters published on this article, none for, none against. I was really surprised to even see it in print. They had to know it would stir up sentiment?
I suspect someone got severely chewed out for it.
""I hear most Delaware politicians talk about reducing gun related crime by taking away the rights of law abiding citizens. Things such as background checks, gun show 'loopholes', magazine limits, etc., are a waste of their time and my rights.
Your article by Esteban Parra point out that criminals do not obey the laws, especially gun restriction laws. And when they are caught in gun related crimes, that charge is usually dropped, 80% was the figure quoted. How did background checks, etc., etc., stop any of their crimes?
Then there is the case of Mr. Pinkston. He had gun charges that would have put him away for 41 years, bargained down to 10 years, yet he only served 1 year. Soon after his release he has a gun and kills someone. How did any gun control law stop this?
This article is an apology by the AG's office for not doing their job. They tell us how hard it is to get a conviction. If the bad guy is back on the street quickly with his illegal gun, how do more gun control laws stop that? It is expensive to prosecute these bad guys, so we can't do that. What is the cost of a life cut short by death or injury from these people? "Project Exile" was briefly mentioned, it was very effective when it was used in Richmond, but costly. Really, costly? It almost eliminated gun related there. Politicians need to stop and think before doing feel good legislation""
I had to cut it short because I had run over there 200 word limit.
Bill
