To the Readers' Forum:
Regarding the recent "drive by shooting" in Jamestown, doesn't anyone else find it intriguing that the person involved wasn't charged with a gun crime, only "reckless endangerment''?
This citizen allegedly saw fit to fire eight shots at random from a moving vehicle on a city street and is charged with reckless endangerment? You can get charged with reckless endangerment for throwing a glass of water at someone!
This illustrates to me that gun laws are not meant (or at least not used) to deter crimes. If they were, he would get tried and if convicted, he would serve a time for the endangerment and also with criminal use of a firearm. Most of the time it seems that even if additional charges related to the use of gun or other weapon are filed, the sentences are served "concurrently." In the retail trades that's called a BOGO, Buy One Get One free! Commit two crimes, serve one sentence!
If you want to deter the use of guns in crimes, impose harsh penalties for them in addition to, not concurrently with, what ever other charges are filed. I would suggest , especially in cases like this one, bring a separate charge of illegal use of a firearm for each shot fired, or even for each round of ammo in the weapon! Then make the criminal serve all sentences consecutively!
Now that would be a deterrent.
John A. Crossley