In response to Peter Johnson's (column) of March 20, I am sorry to say that Mr. Johnson has exhibited the ignorance that is common among those with anti-gun ideals.

This ignorance often results in unfair generalizations, such as those Mr. Johnson makes.

All of the information in his column stem from the misconception that "semi-automatic" means the same as "assault weapon." It does not.

The worst of his generalizations is that "semi-automatic weapons serve no purpose for the average law-abiding citizen." Wrong, Mr. Johnson.

I personally own four shotguns used for hunting that are semi-automatic. (Each has a different barrel length and choke, for most effectively harvesting a certain type of game. Hence the need for four.)

Semi-automatic shotguns give me an effective second-shot capability so that I can be assured that the birds I shoot at will end up on my dinner table and not wounded in the woods.

Being a sportsman, I hate nothing more than a wounded animal, and therefore hunt with the gun that provides me the ability for a quick and clean kill. You are incorrect in saying that "semi-automatics serve no useful sporting purpose."

Further, you also are in error to generalize that semi-automatics are not needed for target shooting.

If you had performed any research, you would have discovered that the rifles of choice for those in high power competition are the M-1, M-1A, and M-14, to the near exclusion of all others. All are semi-automatic.

In a sport that demands consciously controlling one's heart rate and weighing bullets and powder charges for consistency to one milligram, you must understand that I am not going to sacrifice accuracy in my rifle so that I can shoot more bullets faster.

Also, it is a very difficult rifle to convert to full-auto capability, requiring an expert gunsmith and many hours time, much more than the "nine minutes . . . and any craftsman" you suggest.

As a former member of the U.S. National Team, I strongly resent any label which may be assigned to me because of the rifle I shoot.

I am an athlete, and my semi-automatic rifle is a very special piece of my equipment. Please do not put me in the same class as street gangs with Uzi's.

Only at the end of your (column), Mr. Johnson, do you use the proper wording for the issue at hand.

"Assault weapons" have no place in civilian society. Their configurations make them useless for hunting or target competition, and they are generally easy to convert to full-auto ability.

The problem is to define them in legislation so that you do not unfairly restrict the ownership of shotguns used for hunting, or target rifles like my M-1.

If the law specifically bans "Uzi's, AK-47's, AK74's, and MAC-10's," then I am all in favor of it.

But when you ignorantly generalize to the point of outlawing quality hunting and competition arms, then you had better believe that I will be paying my NRA dues for another year.