If you have been reading or hearing the gun-grabbing politicians lately, you will see the title of this letter frequently. It is used as the motivation for sweeping changes in gun laws that probably will do no good at all. The phrase is a handy emotional appeal for actions to solve a problem that doesn't involve many deaths, compared with other daily tragedies.

A 3-year-old is killed in Connell by a pickup truck; why not ban pickup trucks? Somebody is in a horrific fatal wreck while texting; why not ban cellphone use in cars (and actually enforce the ban)? A child drowns while swimming; why not ban swimming by minors?

I realize that the one-child argument is meant to imply that the child could be yours, but it can produce some pretty silly and nonproductive results in law.

ROY BUNNELL, Kennewick