To the Editor:
Peter DeMaria ("Controlling Assault Weapons Hyperbole," The Dartmouth, November 10) is the individual who needs to do his homework and also evaluate his rhetoric. Ending his letter with a juvenile admonishment for Michael Belinsky to do his homework and get it right, does nothing to elevate the level of debate within the Dartmouth community. Furthermore, DeMaria does not have his facts straight regarding the 1994 assault weapons ban. In addition to the much-maligned "two characteristics" rule the 1994 law banned the sale of 19 specific firearms or copies thereof regardless of their accessories. Both the Kalashnikov AK-47 and the Colt AR-15 were directly banned.
As an avid sportsman, I support the right to bear arms, but there are legitimate restrictions that need to be placed on how this right is exercised. Perhaps the 1994 ban was not the perfect law, but it was a step towards a more rational firearms policy. I don't see why Americans have no objection to strict licensing and registration of vehicles to ensure public safety, yet are stringently opposed to similar procedures regarding the even more dangerous act of firearms ownership. Or more poignantly, how can we ask our servicemen and women to engage in dangerous house-to-house searches in Iraq and Afghanistan to seize the same weapons that we have just legalized at home. Mr. DeMaria, how about some constructive conversation on these topics rather than pithy attempts at suppressing debate?