The New York Times opinion post discussed the awkward meaning of phrases such as “gun control”. They have an implicit bias and also are not entirely constructive in articulately addressing an issue.

John | Keno, Oregon
Your article is well stated. The label for the issue becomes the implicit solution. This is pretty obvious. We all care about people dying and being maimed, but many of us have studied the subject and differ on the effectiveness of solutions. We see “gun control” as a partisan statement with little demonstrated solution. “Gun safety” is only a euphemism that means gun control by many who use it. By being a range safety officer I actively support gun safety that has little to do with partisan gun control. Unfortunately, the rhetoric only gives us two paths: Limiting access to firearms and ammunition, potentially severely, or just saying no. We need the courage and justice of a process that defines other options that balances liberty and safety. We need the fundamentals of both. We have success with local government and nonprofits using intervention, training, counseling, mentorship. This may require federal investment in local institutions. With engagement by all, there are solutions. What stifles solution are extreme options, power plays to severe regulation, stonewalling resulting in and a lack of engagements. Thank you Frank –