Mike Collins, Marco Island
An arms race
One argument made by the National Rifle Association and its supporters is that we citizens need arms to defend ourselves, not from foreign invaders, but from a closer enemy — our own government.
So these self-declared patriots are going to save us from the feds by stocking a proper arsenal of the most lethal small arms available.
But wait. The feds not only have assault rifles, but machine guns as well. I think the National Rifle Association would certainly understand the use of machine guns for citizen self-defense; but machine guns might not be sufficient.
The Army, Marines and Air Force have tanks, missiles and aircraft. Ergo, we need anti-tank weapons, some sort of missile shield and, of course, our own fighter planes.
Where does this madness end? Or more to the point, how did it begin?
Does any rational person truly believe this line of nonsense?
In the meantime, I'm planning to vote only for those politicians who refuse contributions from the NRA, if I can find any.