In his Aug. 30 article on Army Spc. Ryan G. Anderson, Jim Haley began by stating that “Anderson had a fascination for guns” and “he spoke often against attempts to restrict them.” Haley then wrote about Anderson’s attempt to aid al-Qaida terrorists. Haley did not explain the relevance of this “fascination” and Anderson’s opposition to restrictions on gun ownership.
I think military personnel would naturally gain an appreciation of weapons as tools (rather than as instruments of terror). In addition, members of the American military have a duty to defend our constitutional rights, including the Second Amendment.
I assume Haley was implying that Anderson is deluded, or is a “gun nut.” Anderson should be judged and sentenced based on his traitorous actions. His apparent defense of gun rights is not the salient point; rather, it is his effort to aid the killing of American troops.
MICHAEL FISCHER
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.