By Francis G. Biss II
Special to the Globe
NEOSHO, Mo. —
Jim Stone’s guest column (Globe, Aug. 29) on the surface seems well thought out and even persuasive.
What it lacks is a basic understanding of what the access to some means of self defense really is. Just because I could go to the local hardware store and buy a chain saw does not mean I would be competent with the tool. Or even reasonably safe for that matter.
Any number of tools can be and are quite dangerous, the onus is on the free individual to be cognizant of one’s strength or weakness in any endeavor. Ultimately it is your responsibility to be competent. If you want to follow the lead of the rest of the “Free World,” then we should immediately regulate everything someone has ever misused. It’s a silly notion when one thinks it through, but many swear by the idea that somehow the gun, knife or frying pan are the real problem and not the individual.
Mr. Stone also is a bit off base when he implies that police being better trained for a close confrontation would be more likely to hit the correct target. This, in actual events, appears to be wrong. Surpassingly the best shooters seem to be citizens, then the police, and finally the suspects. The private citizen’s goal is only to bring an end to the situation at hand and not to wreak mayhem as many believe, this is quite different from the many things a police officer is concerned with.
Also be aware that while a shotgun is an imposing weapon and with birdshot a bit less of a danger to others, it is not perfect. Two main things to consider. Many homes these days have rather flimsy interior walls and birdshot can pose a danger. Secondly, drugged or otherwise determined assailants will find a long barrel easier to pry from one’s control. All that means is no choice is perfect. One must do some real checking to know what fits your circumstance.
Francis G. Biss II
Neosho
