Jeffrey Haycraft is a resident of Camden.
Jeff Hague’s rebuttal to my recent letter rests on a series of half-truths, misused statistics and the same tired talking points that have kept Delaware — and America — trapped in a cycle of gun violence (“Writer spins gun control argument”). His argument boils down to a false narrative: Punish criminals but don’t bother with prevention. Recent events, however, including the shooting of Charlie Kirk, remind us just how dangerous it is to cling to that oversimplification.
On ‘25,000 gun laws’
Mr. Hague insists that firearms are already the “most heavily regulated consumer product” in America, with some 25,000 laws. This is misleading. Most of those laws are repetitive or overlap between state, local and federal codes. And, crucially, many glaring gaps remain — like the private-sale loophole that allows buyers to avoid background checks altogether. No serious criminologist believes we’ve already “done enough.”
On how criminals get guns
Mr. Hague cherry-picks a single prison survey to claim that 86% of crime guns are stolen or obtained underground. The Bureau of Justice Statistics paints a different picture: Roughly 43% of crime guns are acquired through black market purchases, and 25% come from friends or family — people who bought them legally. Only about 6% were directly stolen. This matters because it shows that crime guns start as legal sales. Strengthening background checks, reporting requirements and safe storage laws addresses this exact pipeline.
On safe storage
Hague dismisses safe storage as burdening law-abiding owners. But research consistently shows that these laws prevent child shootings and youth suicides. The American Academy of Pediatrics, hardly a “radical” group, calls safe storage essential to public health. When someone like Kirk’s shooter can access a firearm in a moment of grievance or crisis, safe storage is not an intrusion — it’s a lifesaving barrier.
On AR-15s and ‘assault-style rifles’
Hague claims that AR-15-style rifles are no more lethal than handguns. The data disagrees. A study published in Injury Epidemiology found that shootings involving assault-style rifles resulted in significantly more people shot and more deaths per incident than those involving other firearms. These are not golf clubs or kitchen knives, as Hague glibly suggests. They are weapons designed for rapid fire, capable of killing dozens in minutes — as Sandy Hook, Uvalde and now many more tragedies attest.
On age restrictions
The Supreme Court has long upheld age limits on dangerous products. We don’t let 18-year-olds buy handguns from dealers because evidence shows that 18- to 20-year-olds commit gun homicides at four times the rate of older adults. Hague himself admits that this demographic commits disproportionate gun violence yet insists access should be expanded. That’s reckless and defies the very data he cites.
On gun violence as a public health crisis
Hague claims that gun violence is not a public health crisis. Tell that to the families of the 48,000 Americans killed by firearms in 2022 — the highest on record. Tell it to the children for whom firearms are now the leading cause of death in the United States. Tell it to the children I work with on a daily basis, who have a very real fear of something happening to them, inculcated by the world we face in 2025. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Medical Association and virtually every major health organization affirm that gun violence is a public health emergency. Facts don’t care about feelings.
On international comparisons
Hague leans on cherry-picked, outdated statistics from 2005 and 2008 to claim that countries with strict gun laws are more violent. That’s simply false. Modern data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development shows that the U.S. firearm death rate is at least four times higher than Canada’s, over 10 times higher than Germany’s and nearly a hundred times higher than Japan’s. Those countries all restrict firearms far more than we do — and they are safer for it.
On accountability versus prevention
Here’s where Hague and I agree (something he conveniently ignores in the name of attacking me): Prosecutors must enforce the laws and stop plea-bargaining away gun crimes. But, to stop pretending, we must choose between accountability and prevention. When Charlie Kirk was shot, it wasn’t because the shooter hadn’t yet racked up a long rap sheet. It was because, in a country awash in guns and lax safeguards, someone angry had easy access to a deadly weapon.
We can’t “lock up” our way out of this crisis. We must act before the trigger is pulled. That means stronger background checks, safe storage requirements, red flag laws and, yes, holding criminals accountable. It’s not either/or. It’s both/and.
The American people, including most gun owners, understand this. Over 80% support universal background checks. The majority support safe storage laws. And nearly all agree that rights come with responsibilities.
Jeff Hague’s response rests on nostalgia for a status quo that has failed us. Delaware and America deserve better: accountability and prevention. That is the only path to safer communities. The simple fact is, I won’t convince Mr. Hague of something that he has already made his mind up about. I have debated point by point in multiple editorials spanning weeks, and he hammers the same false equivalencies and talking points. I even pointed out that I am not “antigun” in my own previous letter, yet he paints me that way because it delivers an emotional, knee-jerk reaction. I am a member of the community here in Delaware, and publishing my own name on these editorials in such a boilerplate political environment means that I stand behind my convictions.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
