I read the Independent every week. Often I agree with the editorials, sometimes I don't, but I have always valued the views on controversial subjects presented. However, the recent editorial by Hal Crowther on guns came across as ravings devoid of much critical thought—ideology without letting logic interfere ("One nation under guns," cover story, April 16).
I think the guns issue is an urban vs. rural perspective problem. In urban areas, guns are generally associated by the populace with crime, that is the setting in which most urbanites encounter guns. In rural areas, the populace associates gun with recreation, because that is overwhelmingly the way that they encounter guns.
Thus, to many urbanites, the gun culture of rural America seems unreasonable, and to many rural dwellers, urbanites' fear seems absurd.
As for the urban crime and safety issue, people who use guns in crimes are mostly using guns acquired illegally. Yes, a few are legally acquired, but overall, criminals use guns that are illegal. Adding more laws is not going to deter someone who was breaking the law to begin with.
Fundamentally, as adults, each of us is responsible for our own safety. Not the police, the government or someone else. I am responsible for my safety. Crowther is responsible for his safety. If he feels that he doesn't need to carry a concealed weapon to be safe, fine. But that doesn't mean he has the right to insist that everyone is safe without carrying a concealed weapon. I don't carry a concealed weapon, but I do not feel the least threatened by someone who is legally carrying one walking down the street with me.