Subscriber Login

Forgot Your Username?
Forgot Your Password?
Johnson could take stand just like Hendricks did here PDF Print E-mail

Letter to the Editor:

If Eagle River councilwoman Carol Hendricks had been occupying the Senate seat held by Sen. Ron Johnson, I bet she would have had the courage and integrity to vote in favor of the gun control legislation that went down to defeat last week (April 17).

Hendricks, who represents Ward 5 on the city council, voted against giving organizers of the Eagle River Gun Show a permit to erect banners over our highways to advertise their show. According to an article in last week’s Vilas County News-Review, Hendricks declared, “Until they get background checks, I’m not in favor of gun shows.”

Johnson voted against legislation that would have closed the “gun show loophole” at shows like the one coming up May 24-26 at the Eagle River Sports Arena. The loophole allows private sellers to sell weapons without a background check.

Why did Johnson vote against background checks? Is he afraid of offending the National Rifle Association (NRA), which invested $1.8 million in his 2010 campaign to unseat former Sen. Russ Feingold? In response to criticism of his pro-gun vote, Johnson said he thinks we have enough gun laws on the books and we don’t need any more.

Former Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot at point-blank range two years ago in Tucson. Six people died in the shooting. Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, founded Americans for Responsible Solutions, which focuses on gun violence.

Giffords, for whom speaking is physically difficult, wrote this: “Mark my words: if we cannot make our communities safer with the Congress we have now, we will use every means available to make sure we have a different Congress, one that puts communities’ interests ahead of the gun lobby’s. To do nothing while others are in danger is not the American way.”

While Johnson curries favor with the NRA and Gun Owners of America, Carol Hendricks spoke up and said what she believes is right. I stand with pride alongside Carol.

Mary Jo Berner

Eagle River

Tuesday, April 23, 2013 2:09 PM


+32 #4 2013-05-02 20:33
Carl, you are in the minority by far as most people don't have a problem with a background check to try to stop mental subjects and felons from buying weapons.
I am a law abiding gun owner and I am all for trying to stop the wrong people from purchasing a gun and killing someone which in turn makes all gun owners look bad. Even if it may only save a few lives it's worth it. Just makes sense!
-28 #3 2013-04-25 13:47
No Jeff, my point was sarcastic in that if we only did background checks on illegally purchased/obtained guns, we would eliminate most gun crimes.

You see, criminals will still get guns no matter how many laws are put in their way. Did you know the Boston Marathon Bombers killed with illegally possessed handguns although the State of Massachusetts has the among the strictist gun laws in the nation?

Making more laws for the law abiding to obey is like closing the barn door after the horse ran out. Doesn't make any sense !
+31 #2 2013-04-24 01:56
So you would be ok with a mentally ill or felon subject buying a gun until he uses it illegally ? Then you want a background check ! Thats like closing the barn door after the horse ran out.
Doesn't make any sense !
-33 #1 2013-04-23 17:53
It took more courage and integrity to vote against the bill that ensured our right to bear arms.

The majority of exhibitors at a gun show are required to run background checks.

Did the mentally unstable gunman in the Giffords case obtain his gun legally? Did he buy his gun at a gun show without getting a background check?

I for one only support background checks on only guns obtained ILLEGALLY.

Add comment

Comments exceeding 1,000 characters will not be accepted. Please refrain from using texting language and spell out all words. All comments are reviewed and must be approved before they are posted.

Security code