In regard to Curtis Lemay’s letter, “Letter about guns made good points,”I have also read disparaging letters and comments on the rant by Diane Rudolph. She was out of line with her childish name calling as well as being wrong in her thinking.

Mr. Lemay is also spreading questionable facts about dealers not being required to perform background checks at gun shows. Licensed dealers are required to run checks no matter where the gun is sold. Fact is, Adam Lanza did not purchase the weapons. He took them from his mother. Therefore, the entire premise of using this situation to further enact laws concerning background checks is scurrilous.

Where did Mr. Lemay gather his facts that drug dealers, felons and lunatics purchase weapons at gun shows? Or was this something he pulled out of his hat? As for the “would-be insurrectionist,” that is a pre-crime. It is not yet against the law to have thoughts.

Adam Lanza was not old enough to purchase the weapons he used, so what good is a background check in this case? If he was old enough, he still had no criminal record. It would have been legal for him to have purchased these weapons. So what is the point of the background checks?

The usual knee-jerk reaction coming from the liberal agenda is to be expected. However, just as Joe Biden, point man for President Obama on this issue, has publicly stated, “Nothing we're going to do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down to 1,000 a year from what it is now.”

There are ample laws on the books. More laws are not only redundant but will be no more effective than the current laws.

Rick Gwinn

Rock Hill