SIR - Letters page veteran George Cowley thankfully escaped injury at the hands of the pot-shot prats who fired on him with an air weapon (Worcester News, March 15).

But I would cross swords with any suggestion that a ban should be consider on air guns.

It is tempting to ban things that have potential to do physical or moral harm. But we cannot legislate our way into a safe and contented society.

What might help is to increase the reward system for information leading to the conviction of those who misuse air weapons.

Indeed, it has long been the case that it is illegal to use an air weapon in a public space. No one has carte blanche to use air weapons however and whenever they like and there are severe penalties available to the courts.

As the editorial suggested, many people may enjoy pinging a few tin cans in the back garden. Why should they lose that simple freedom?

When I was younger such practice was common and I owned two such weapons, as did many of my friends. None of us would have have even dreamed of firing on another person, and I am sure the majority of users today feel the same, although there are more problems these days as shown by what happened to George and the papergirl April Dennis.

Air weapons rarely kill people and so it might be argued there is no case for a total ban.

Alcohol is a factor in the deaths of many innocent third parties in road deaths as well as in many more murders than air weapons. There are no plans to ban drinking. Too many people enjoy a tipple and the Treasury rakes in the revenue.

Guns are illegal, and a healthy black market feeds the needs of the malicious who wish to misuse them. A ban has not significantly curtailed the miserable consequences that society endures.

The best solution with air weapons is to educate about the dangers, offer rewards for information and stronger penalties. It is better to be realistic than idealistic.

Andrew Brown, Worcester.