The Day’s editors again shared their misdirected outrage at rifle and gun owners after an Islamist terrorist attack on America. You lament the lack of firearms (and owner) registration though the terrorist attacks would have been unaffected. You recommend gun prohibition for people on the terrorist/no fly lists, ignoring their 14th Amendment Constitutional rights. You suggest an assault weapon/high capacity magazine ban would have meaningful benefits despite the CDCs findings of no benefit from the previous 1994 ban.

The Armalite-style rifle is the most common “personal defense weapon” (DHS term), available in 25-plus calibers, and used more for hunting and target shooting than any other rifle. You focus contempt toward owners of five-plus million AR rifles but nowhere do you mention Islam, Jihad, or Muslim. You think the gun just loaded itself and started shooting?

You argue adopting these measures would be a “step in the right direction.” Please have the integrity to explain your vision of what’s at the end of those steps. What restrictions on some 80-plus million gun owners will satisfy you? And what restrictions would you propose for the 3.3 million resident Muslims? Be honest.

Darryl Conner

Ledyard