Joe Gannon in his Aug. 10 column “It’s time to awaken from our ‘Spiritual death,’” enlightens readers to the basic reasons Americans are divided on gun control and will grow further from finding the solutions to mass shootings.
Gannon said it most clearly: There are “opposite understanding” and premises liberals versus conservatives use to support their solutions to end mass shootings. Both sides feel well grounded in their sightings of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to defend their positions, (while we all live in grief and fear).
I am writing to ask Joe, though, and anyone writing for the Gazette, to think twice of using the term “slaughter” in describing these mass attacks. I believe “slaughter” should be reserved for the description of livestock preparation for food. Readers get lost — their minds wander away from each paragraph using this word choice. I know the dictionaries show a second or third description of slaughter in the case of “acts of killings” or “mass murders,” but a writer’s responsibility and success in communicating to readers is in using the clearest, purist, first definition in language choices.
We are of a primarily agriculture and livestock nature here in Pioneer Valley. But here, and in everywhere in America, murder — mass murder — means the same thing: tragic loss of “human” life.
Sharon Judge
Amherst