Letter: Need should not be the sole criterion for gun ownership
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Does Bryan Appleyard ("Staring down the barrel of an American icon", 30 May) seriously believe that the dedication, commitment and sheer hard work involved in, say, top level target shooting is motivated by some kind of warped sense of power? He clearly cannot comprehend the drive which pushes sportsmen and women to give their absolute best in their chosen sport. The motives of those who strive to achieve the standard necessary to shoot for their clubs, their county or their country are no different from those of cricketers, hockey players or showjumpers.
I accept that I would be joining the ranks of the unbalanced if I were to claim that every club shooter spends his or her time focusing on competing successfully in ever higher levels of competition. There are weekend cricketers and sometime cricketers, just as there are weekend shooters and sometime shooters. However the bottom line is that Mr Appleyard clearly believes that need should be the sole criterion on which gun ownership is based, and that target shooting at any level does not represent such a need. If Lord Cullen takes that view, the fact - corrupt or otherwise - is that the armed crime statistics will remain unchanged (you report that there are 500,000 to 1 million illegal guns in circulation) and the possibility of another Dunblane will be reduced slightly but will still remain.
PHILIP NOWAK
Sayers Common, West Sussex
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments