"Would these same regulations [on automobiles] be too restrictive for the ownership of an assault weapon?"


regulations smaller

Today's L.A. Times letter to the editor, because our voices matter... but first, a comment. We don't buy automobiles intending to use them as deadly weapons, especially mass murder weapons. That's why they're called car "accidents." So comparing cars to guns never sits right with me. That said:

Re "System to vet buyers of guns flawed," Jan. 13

Most Americans regularly operate their own killing machine — an automobile — yet few, if any, protest the strict regulations on their use.

We are required to register the vehicle and take a practical test to prove we are capable of operating it safely. We must take a written exam to ascertain our knowledge of the laws governing the operation of our potentially lethal weapon. In addition, we must allow the state to take our photograph to ensure our identity and pass an eye test to further assure our competence. We must carry this license with us at all times when driving and must present our registration and license when requested to do so by police.

Would these same regulations be too restrictive for the ownership of an assault weapon?

Phyllis Golden Gottlieb

Los Angeles