ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT


FEATURED JOBS



Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Delicious
E-mail this article
Print this Article
advertisement

In the letter, “The multiple arguments in favor of no control of guns” [Maryland Independent, March 6], the writer gets himself limited to echoing the empty arguments of gun-grabbers in the debate to infringe on Americans’ legal ownership of firearms. He’s stuck spouting Piers Morgan’s defeated argument that the Second Amendment limits Americans to ownership of single-shot muskets.

He’s cornered into the argument that “just because you own a gun doesn’t make you any safer,” defying all statistics to the contrary.

I like his idea of making it more difficult for violent people to be violent, but that argues against the current liberal judicial catch-and-release atmosphere in America.

Let’s be honest. If the arguments were valid, the First Amendment would not protect politicians for their lies in television commercials or radio talk-show hosts because electronic media was not envisioned in the 18th century, when the constitutional rights of Americans were being refined. Police could use electronic surveillance to scan your home to watch whatever you’re doing at night in your bedroom because the Fourth or Fifth amendments didn’t envision the electronic capabilities of today.

Because the sixth amendment didn’t envision social media, let’s not be surprised if a trial for a crime becomes “How many likes can you get on Facebook in the next two days?”

Nobody would tell when your train, bus or airplane needed preventive maintenance because the internal combustion engine or flight wasn’t even dreamed of in the same time.

The answer is that the Second Amendment was written very clearly, concisely and unarbitrarily for all to understand. The rights of the people (not the militia, not the President’s increasingly armed Department of Homeland Security, not the local police) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Let the gun-grabbers meet and talk among themselves, but let’s not clutter the public discourse with their foolishness.

Let’s not even begin with the silliness that we have to stop people from exercising their constitutional rights, as Norma S. Powers presents in the same issue of the Maryland Independent [“Gun legislation does not infringe on rights].



Mike Benge, Waldorf