Gun control is only realistic answer

I disagree with Kristopher Rich's suggestion that the "litany of cries" for gun control after NIU are simpletonian.

Isn't it clear that our current gun laws aren't working and should be reviewed and updated?

He argues that without guns, the "physically strong (would be) preying on the weak." If this is true, then we'll all worry about who's "faster to the draw" instead.

People are afraid to take their kids to school. Do I train my 3-year-old to use guns to protect himself at school? Where does it end?

Citizens pay extra to protect police forces from guns, to train security personnel and to medically treat those who are shot. It is an easy argument that these resources could be used elsewhere instead of against guns.

There are 15 states that have a crime rate worse than Illinois, so concealed weapons aren't the answer. U.S. citizens own over 233 million guns and almost 35,000 people are killed each year in the U.S. with guns.

I'm not interested in stopping people from owning guns, protecting themselves or hunting.

All I know is that on Feb. 2 and 14, a bunch of people died and they were shot by guns.

Banning guns outright may never completely eliminate the threat. However, it is far less likely that the "sick," "twisted" and "crazed" people will be outlawed, and until they are, I'm ready to explore every alternative.

Eric Podlogar

Hoffman Estates