Although, I am generally liberal, I call them like I see them and tend not to believe the fringes on either side.

As such I have researched the gun issue. I looked to see if there is a correlation of gun ownership to murder rate in other countries that could clarify the issue for us in the U.S.

What I found was two striking statistics.

I found that the U.K. has a higher murder rate (at the time I researched it) than the U.S. and yet it is nearly impossible to get a gun permit there. I also found that New Zealand has a very low murder rate ??? and surprisingly, one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world.

So based on that, while we clearly have a problem, as usual we have chosen a simplistic dialog in search for solutions.

Sincerely,
Scott Miles

Sent by Scott Miles | 3:05 PM ET | 04-18-2007

I think it is unfortunate that MPR continues to unquestioningly buy the anti-second amendment crowd's usual line about gun control.
Their latest stealth plan is to call it "gun safety" and to pass them selves off as "pro-hunting" organizations. As usual they will use the latest tragic incident to push their views of "security and safety" at the expense of larger issues of freedom, the US Constitution, and responsibility.
To see how well "gun control" works(i.e. ultimately banning guns) look at cities like Washington DC. They have the most anti-second amendment gun laws, and strangely among the highest murder rates. The city of Chicago has restrictive gun laws, and has plenty of areas you would be foolish to wander through unarmed. Australia and England have restrictive gun bans, and aggressively prosecute crime victims acting in self defense- their violent crime goes up, not down. Had one or two of the Virginia Tech victims (say a prof.) had a concealed carry permit and been allowed the right of self defense (denied on most campuses) the murder could have perhaps been stopped sooner. How does a "lock-down" help you when the killer is in your class room- or a SWAT team when they are down the block.
If politicians and talking heads on either side of the gun issue are going to be allowed to spout their views they should have to back them up with some solid data- MPR should hold them to a few facts in any case....

Sent by Daniel L. Truchon | 4:54 PM ET | 04-18-2007

Great, balanced show NPR, yet again.

McCarthy gets almost the entire spot to explain the gun control view, then you allow a contra-example all of one sentence, which was then misunderstood and replied to by McCarthy again.

Cho was ruled mentally ill by a court. If he had been truthful about it on the Brady form, he would not have been able to legally buy a gun in the first place.

He may then have had to resort to a can of gasoline and a match, getting a job in the kitchen, renting a Ryder truck or just using some other everyday item to do his work.

Why not just impose the existing checks properly and stop the triade against the legal and law-abiding gun owners.

Oh, and we love LIBERTY, not guns. They are just the means to keep it.

Sent by Dave thA | 5:26 PM ET | 04-18-2007

I cant get over how the anti gunners always compare the USA with Europe when it comes to the FINAL GUN SOLUTION. I seem to recall that they (europeans)were completely over run by the Nazi's and that they were at the mercy of the former gun control governments (their own included). They at one time said "that could never happen here, not in the twentieth century" ..... wrong! I am not about to subject my posterity and fellow countrymen to the same fate chosen by do gooders before me. Millions lost and families wiped out, never again, NOT HERE!
Sincerely; John

Sent by John, twice USA veteran | 6:06 PM ET | 04-19-2007

Please, please, please don't degrade the awful Virginia Tech tragedy into an opportunity to advance failing liberal positions on gun control (or gun safety). The defeat of the Bush-Cheney monarchy and their heirs in the 2008 presidential contest is the paramount political decision facing our nation so far this century. The utter failure of the Iraq war, the restriction of personal liberties, tax cuts for the rich, shrinking of the middle class, etc, etc moved the huge body of centrist independent voters from the right to the left, handing the democrats victory in Nov '06. These victories however weren't good enough to warrant a return to knee-jerk liberalism. The democrats hold on the majority is due to the failure of the right, not an alternative. Your reporting that resurrects the traditional liberal plank of gun-control with the specter of the NRA as public enemy No. 1 will help move this vital center back to the right, thereby helping lose the real war in '08. Democrats and left-leaning media like NPR need to re-examine their long-term strategy if they are to prove they are something other than the party most capable of losing the most important elections.

Sent by Joe from New Hampshire | 9:58 AM ET | 04-20-2007

Why is it that we trust police to carry firearms and we do not trust our other fellow citizens when the facts CLEARLY show that armed civilians are AT LEAST as safe as off-duty police in firearm use, and they too reduce crime and save lives, sometimes even the lives of cops?
Why are real-life stories of lawful civilian gun use saving lives rarely reported? Stories such as:
At an eighth-grade school dance in Pennsylvania, a boy fatally shot a teacher and wounded two students before the owner of the dance hall brought the killing to a halt with his own gun and saving other lives.
In October 1997 Luke Woodham killed his mother, then went to school and killed 2 and shot 7 other students with a rifle before Assistant Principal Joel Myric ran to his car, retrieved his handgun, and used it to subdue Woodham until police arrived, thereby saving additional lives.
More recently, and just a few miles from Virginia Tech, two law school students ran to fetch their legally owned firearms to stop a madman from slaughtering others.
I submit that if students and faculty at VT had been allowed to exercise their right to lawfully carry concealed firearms, the story today would have been less tragic. Ms. McCarthy certainly has the right to her opinions; but her right of expression stops where my right of self defense starts. Just because some do not wish to defend their own life, with deadly force if necessary, does not mean they have the right to deny the rest of us the right of self-defense when warranted to save lives.
Shame on NPR for not taking the time to investigate the facts and provide at least a balanced discussion, if not honest and truthful reporting; instead opting for opinion and a predictable knee-jerk reaction calling for more gun control under the guise of gun safety. Shame on the VT administration and the VA legislature too for their potential role in exacerbating the body count by preventing law-abiding citizens from their right to self-defense by preventing them their right to carry concealed firearms.
Check the facts for yourself at: http://justfacts.com/gun_control.htm

Sent by Bill Birchfield | 11:04 PM ET | 04-22-2007