Editor,

Well, Ms. Mayer has certainly done a great hatchet job on the Second Amendment (April 29 letter to the editor). Obviously, anyone who supports the right to own a firearm, or more specifically an “assault weapon,” is a deranged individual just waiting to spray bullets on unsuspecting schoolchildren, church goers and shopping mall patrons. That she probably couldn’t identify the difference between an “assault” weapon and a hunting rifle makes no real difference. In her world, all guns are bad. What she fails to understand is that a firearm is a tool. As a tool, it can be used in a number of ways, both good and bad. She need not use the tool, but why deny it to others?

Statistics on people who are killed by knives outnumber those killed by assault rifles by a factor of five to one. There is no outrage over knife manufacturers even though there is no reason for the mayhem they cause. Likewise, automobiles are used in multiple crimes including theft, property destruction and murder, but we seem to divorce the action from the tool. So why blame guns?

Even the politicians can’t accurately identify “assault,” but use the term to cover whatever is offensive to them on whatever day they choose. They don’t like an armed populace but are prevented from taking action against citizens owning firearms by the Second Amendment. The writers of the Bill of Rights understood that words on a paper were meaningless without a means to defend them. The Second Amendment was meant to keep tyrants in line, and for over two hundred years it has succeeded.

So, I am willing to pass any law that condemns the misuse of a tool by people bent on criminal action, be it gun, knife, auto or baked lasagna, but leave my Second Amendment alone.

Fred Wilferth

Coupeville