We cannot compromise or negotiate the Second Amendment

In the more than two decades I’ve been involved in the Second Amendment community one thing has been constant. The public conversation around guns has always focused on the unkindest stereotypes of gun owners and the left’s self-serving caricature of those of us who defend the basic human right to security.

Because of the overall trajectory of the culture war, the debate surrounding guns and gun rights is now at a critical impasse and it’s no longer productive or genuine to approach the issue as if in a vacuum with no larger context.

Many people seem to struggle with objective facts and absolute reality. Postmodern thinking prevents some from accepting the fact that reality is something independent of the individual, and instead choose to believe reality is mercurial and optional. This fundamental fallacy is largely responsible for the widespread belief that there is actually a debate on the validity and scope of gun rights.

Regardless of our personal feelings or historical contempt for the law by elected officials, in the United States an individual’s right to be armed as they see fit is not actually in question. The issue was settled when the constitution was ratified, all subsequent federal restrictions are illegal and well outside the scope of legitimate political authority.

What we’re actually debating when discussing the gun issue is whether or not we should follow the constitution, ignore it, or manipulate it to meet the political needs of a given moment. The reason the founders included the Bill of Rights in the constitution was so that we wouldn’t be controlled by the beliefs and opinions of other people. They understood human nature and its flaws, and they knew basic human rights would suffer at the hands of neurotic people with a warped view of their own enlightenment and judgment.

Ignorant or sociopaths

The necessary pivot point in the public discourse on guns and gun rights is a sober recognition of the people involved. Gun control advocates vary from well-meaning people who are simply ignorant, to sociopaths with an unhealthy drive to make choices for other people and control the behavior of those around them.

The well-meaning but ignorant person may be swayed by well-crafted arguments, but sociopaths only incorporate outside information at their convenience and facts don’t intrude on their personal desires.

Individuals from any walk of life who led the proverbial charge on gun control are very problematic. They take the form of legislators introducing gun control bills, advocates who apply social pressure to manipulate government officials, or media and entertainment personalities who use their public influence to promote the restriction of personal freedom. In recent years we’ve seen these phenomena spread beyond controlling other’s guns to controlling speech, associations and even their personal health preferences.

An often-overlooked fact about social-control sociopaths is how progressively unsatisfied they are with compromise. People have falsely believed working and compromising with them would create peace, but feeding their negative impulses only strengthens their drive for more control.

The pro-gun culture needs to evolve to recognize supporters and authors of gun control for who they really are, the unstable element of humanity our society was constructed to contain and protect us from.

Collective controls

The belief that basic rights inherent to your humanity should be subject to collective or authoritarian controls is the nucleus all human evil is built around. The unabridged freedom to justly acquire sustenance, shelter and security is the primary criteria of a civilized society.

Controlling guns is not the path to peace and civility, a commitment to freedom and refusing to entertain the darkest impulses of human nature is. There is a direct relationship between the amount of contempt someone has for you and their perceived need to control you.

All gun control is always wrong under all circumstances, and the people working to implement it don’t simply represent different opinions. They’re bad faith actors with the objective of grooming our society for even greater levels of authoritarianism.

The people who advocate for your disarmament are your enemies, not your negotiating partners.

In defense of AR-15, Second Amendment

A recent letter discussed the dangerous capabilities of the AR-15, dubbed by many a “weapon of war” designed to maim and kill. The absurdity of this claim is apparent to anyone who has spent time with and owns this platform of rifle. From flintlocks in the 1800s to revolvers in the 1900’s and AR-15s in the 2000s, firearms have always been tools; ones that can be used for many things. Much as a hammer can be used to drive nails into wood, an AR-15 can be used for many productive tasks and is not simply a killing machine — even though it can be used as such.

Like many tools, all guns are deadly in the right hands. This is precisely why more responsibly armed good Samaritans are something we should all want. I know and trust my community to handle firearms and use them to protect each other. If you want evidence of this happening in similar places, look up the Greenwood Park Mall shooting or the recent incident at the Renaissance Circle apartments in Charleston — both cases involve responsibly armed citizens who used the Second Amendment to stop mass shooters. Ironically, both perpetrators in these cases brought an AR-15 to gun down innocent people but were stopped by civilians with handguns.

Obviously, AR-15s are only as effective as those who wield them and become less deadly to potential mass shooters against a responsible and well-armed populace. Consider the countless other defensive uses of firearms each year, and we would do well to remember that our fellow civilians are the first line of defense against threats to the community and should have the best tools to do the job, including handguns and AR-15s. This is especially true considering criminals aren’t looking to follow gun prohibition laws anyway and will probably have the tools they want to enact their destructive delusions.

Alexander Crecelius

Sheridan

Give up your gun rights and more freedoms will fall

“He makes wars cease to the end of the earth; he breaks the bow and shatters the spear; he burns the chariots with fire (Psalm 46:9).”

Would-be dictators, be forewarned. In the meantime, into day’s world, those who would pound their swords into plow shares, will plow the fields for those who don’t. Never ever give up your rights. Ever.

Americans are freeborn and proof of that is our God-given rights. Any gun legislation infringing on the right to self-defense chips away at that freedom. Beware the false promise of peace through disarmament.

New gun laws won’t fix the problem

Another senseless act of violence against children and anti-gun groups are blaming gun advocates for this violence, but the answer could be closer to home.

Gun control has been with us since 1968 and since then a myriad of gun laws has emerged. Clearly, they haven’t worked. Totally ignored are the shooters who have been from broken homes, isolated, prone to other types of violence, had interactions with police and been active on social media. Their behavior was excused or ignored.

The politicians say it’s easy to get a gun, but if the system was effective and criminals prosecuted, it could be more of a deterrent to block sales to potential shooters. While enhanced background checks may sound good, if the local authority doesn’t inform the investigating agency, and in most cases they don’t, then a shooter will be able to get guns. Reporting agencies aren’t obligated to inform them.

If all factors are considered, then it is not a gun problem, and a new gun law will not fix it. The legal gun owner is not the problem, and within the context of self-defense they prevent potential victims in defense of self or others, often without shots fired. The gun-owning public has grown and includes women, minorities and prior gun control advocates due to violent criminals having gun charges disappear in plea bargaining, as well as being released before the ink is dry on the booking form.

The danger of being a victim has increased because of an agenda that puts criminals ahead of the public’s safety. Unfortunately, many mass shootings are ignored by the media such as in Chicago or New York, but gang violence has become commonplace and non-newsworthy except to those affected in the inner cities. Poor minorities tend to bear the brunt of ineffective political policies.

President Joe Biden has suggested that the Second Amendment is “not absolute” and if so, then freedom of speech, religion, assembly and the press are also “not absolute.”

William Aherin, Southampton

It’s sensible to own an AR-15
By Jim Beckham, Henderson Friday, June 10, 2022 | 2 a.m.

I get so upset when I hear President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and other members of the Biden team talk about people not needing an AR-15-type assault weapon because its sole purpose is to kill people, and that was not what was guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

First, that is not the sole purpose of the AR-15. Many Americans just enjoy taking it out to shoot at targets and improve their skill with the weapon that could be used to defend their homes.

Secondly, the militia language in the Second Amendment indicates to many scholars that the states that approved that amendment hoped their residents would keep a weapon to defend their new country should another country invade, or an uprising were to take place within their new state.

Well, the musket was the arms for war when that amendment was written, and semiautomatic weapons, including the AR-15, are the arms for war today. For that reason, if citizens want to be prepared for invasions or internal strife, the AR-15-type weapon is the most appropriate to own today.

I would wager that Ukrainians wish their country had a Second Amendment to allow citizens to own weapons to prepare to defend their nation.

Letters to the Editor: You don’t have to shoot someone to use a gun defensively

To the editor: Dr. Steven J. Sainsbury pushes the absurd claim there are only 2,000 defensive gun uses per year. (“Thinking of buying a gun for self-defense? Don’t do it,” Opinion, Jan. 31)

The claim overwhelmingly relies on counting defensive gun uses reported in news articles, but that is a dramatic undercount because the vast majority of successful self-defense cases don’t make the news. Ninety-five percent of defensive gun uses involve merely brandishing a gun, and less than 1% involve the attacker being killed or wounded.

But most news stories only report on cases where attackers are killed and brandishings are ignored.

Seventeen national surveys find an average of 2 million defensive gun uses per year. The U.S. Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey puts it at around 100,000. Both show the 2,000 claim to be ridiculous.

Finally, the article labels me as a “gun rights advocate,” not a researcher who has held academic positions at the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Chicago, Stanford and Yale. I have also been a senior advisor for research at the U.S. Department of Justice.

John R. Lott Jr., Missoula, Mt.

BLUF:
After nearly a decade and a half of this subversion, the challenge to New York’s carry permit law gives the justices a chance to provide courts like the 9th Circuit with some much-needed guidance. A ruling upholding the right to bear arms would help protect what Thomas aptly calls “this Court’s constitutional orphan.”

An opinion from a California judge shows federal courts have no respect for gun rights
The Supreme Court may finally rectify that situation when it rules on the constitutionality of a New York law that gives local authorities wide discretion to decide who may carry guns in public.

In one opinion published last week, 9th Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke said Ventura County, California, violated the Second Amendment when it shut down gun stores early in the COVID-19 pandemic. In another opinion the same day, VanDyke said the county’s policy was perfectly consistent with the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

That second, tongue-in-cheek opinion was meant to illustrate the disrespect that the 9th Circuit and other federal appeals courts have shown for the Second Amendment since 2008, when the Supreme Court explicitly recognized that the provision guarantees an individual right to armed self-defense. The Court may finally rectify that situation this term when it rules on the constitutionality of a New York law that gives local authorities wide discretion to decide who may carry guns in public.

Continue reading “”

Stop the fearmongering on guns

In a Dec. 31 guest column (”Locked and loaded – and inviting disaster”), Matthew P. Moriarty called the Ohio legislature “gun-crazy” for proposing to make concealed-carry licensing optional. But his arguments parrot the same alarmist talking points we’ve been hearing for 20 years whenever there’s a bill to allow law-abiding gun owners a little more freedom. His most egregious claim was that, “Criminals might be able to carry with no fear of a concealed-weapon prosecution.” That’s misleading.

Nothing in the proposed legislation would empower criminal behavior. Those who are prohibited from possessing guns would continue to be prohibited. Areas off-limits for firearms, such as school zones and posted property, would continue to be off-limits. And the standard for using lethal force in self-defense would not change.

Moriarty talks as if permitless carry is an untested idea. But in fact it’s the law in 21 states, including Ohio’s neighbors West Virginia and Kentucky. Plus, 34 states, including Ohio, already allow open carry without a license.

All of these states are doing just fine. The alarmist claims never materialize. So stop the fearmongering.

Dean Rieck, Westerville

Dean Rieck is executive director of the Buckeye Firearms Association.

GunSense Vermont takes the side of criminal entities

To the editor: This is in response to a letter to the editor from GunSense Vermont than ran in the Nov. 30 edition of the Montpelier-Barre Times Argus.

I have to wonder why “thoughtful people” and GunSense Vermont (GSVT) are appalled by the Rittenhouse verdict. Kyle Rittenhouse, who defended himself from a violent and life threatening attack, was charged, tried and acquitted by a jury of his peers. This is a clear example of self defense against known criminals.

Thoughtful people should wonder who GSVT is trying to protect — pedophiles, domestic abusers, or repeat offenders who illegally possess firearms? Rittenhouse’s attackers were all of the above, and GSVT takes the side of such criminal entities in their commentary.

Were the activities on that day a peaceful march like GSVT would have you believe? No, these law breakers were involved in a violent riot complete with looting and vandalism. The Rittenhouse verdict sends the right message, upholding the rule of law. Every citizen has the right to defend himself and herself.

Speaking of shooting defenseless victims, have you heard what Alec Baldwin has been up to recently? Where is your outrage, GSVT?

Randy Gray

N. Springfield, Vermont, Dec. 14

The Gun Culture I Know

In a recent Pundit column in these pages, Ruchama Benhamou paints a grim picture of what she calls “gun culture in America.” This culture, she writes, is one where guns “are often used to promote power and incite fear” as opposed to being used for self-defense. This culture has apparently led “to an increase in mass shootings and gun violence all around the country.” How does she know this? Where has she learned of the inner motives of gun owners and their culture? And how does she know her causal claim that the increase in mass shootings and gun violence can be linked to this pervasive culture? We don’t know, for she cites no sources to justify her claims on both points.

My goal here is not to discuss gun policy and its constitutional implications; I have done that elsewhere. Nor do I want to discuss what accounts for much of this nation’s gun violence. I write here to correct the author’s (mis)perception of gun culture. So, allow me to describe the gun culture that I know.

For the readers who don’t know me personally, I must mention that I am a proud gun owner. I carry my firearm religiously, sliding it into my holster whenever I leave my house, be it to the supermarket or to shul. If you ever catch me out and about here in my hometown of Philadelphia, you’d likely not even notice my gun at my side. But it is there, ready to be used in an act of defense to protect me, my family and everyone around me from a lunatic who wishes to do us harm. My firearm was there to protect my neighbor when I heard his house being broken into this past Passover. My gun was there when, at the height of last summer’s riots, I heard someone smash my (other) neighbor’s car windows in the dead of night, frightening my entire household. The only fear my CZ-P10c has incited is in the hearts of those miscreants who stood down the working end of it; to those behind it, it has brought nothing but comfort and security.

And I am not the only one who can attest to this phenomenon. The CDC has noted that “Americans use firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times every year.” There are a plethora of stories and anecdotes about good Samaritans using their firearms, like a few years ago:

A concealed-carry permit holder intervened to stop a mentally disturbed man who was endangering drivers by throwing chunks of concrete and metal pipes at cars passing by on the interstate. The man had damaged almost a dozen cars and was holding a large piece of metal when the permit holder drew his handgun and detained the man until police could arrive. One of the drivers whose car was damaged told reporters that she was thankful the permit holder saved her and other drivers from further harm.

The five or so of us guys who carry to shul are a blessing to our congregation, whose members have encouraged us. We are not only trained marksmen, but we are also trained in various levels of first aid. I myself carry a tourniquet in my pocket, realizing that I am likely to use it more than I am likely to draw my gun. Many gun-oriented companies, such as T-Rex Arms or The Warrior Poet Society, emphasize how important it is to be self-sufficient first responders, ready to terminate threats and simultaneously save lives. Any glance at their websites or YouTube pages will make that abundantly clear. Gun ranges across the country often have as much programming dedicated to first aid as they do to marksmanship. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that concealed-carry permit holders are, by far, the most law-abiding demographic of Americans.

Those who are not self-proclaimed members of the gun community and its surrounding culture should recognize how special both are. It is a culture that treasures the sanctity of human life. It is a culture that chooses not to stand idly by in the face of those evil people who have no regard for life or property. It is a culture where, as Thomas Jefferson wrote to George Washington, “One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.”

This is the gun culture I know. I’m glad you now know it too.

We need common-sense control — of criminals
The laws are there to protect us, but laws don’t stop criminals.

Last weekend’s shooting in St. Paul was a terrible tragedy, predicted by Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher as he patrolled the area the night before. The knee-jerk reaction of Gov. Tim Walz, Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Democrats in the Legislature could also have been predicted: Calls for universal background checks and red flags laws.

These reactions ignore the reality of the situation: Criminals don’t follow laws.

Democrats largely overlooked the death of another woman, in Minneapolis last week, who was hit by one of two cars involved in a rolling gun battle. Five Minneapolis children have been shot by stray bullets this year alone and they didn’t roll out the news releases.

But this event — a mass shooting — finally warrants comment.

Even more predictable and laughable is blaming Republicans for gun violence because we stand with law-abiding citizens and their right to own a gun for self-defense.

Our Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committeeheld hearings to review the current laws on the booksaddressing gun crimes in 2020. Several citizens wearing  “Moms Demand Action” T-shirts told me after the hearing that they had no idea we already had so many laws to address gun violence.

Those laws weren’t passed on a whim, hoping they would be followed. We didn’t debate the criminal code at length so it can be ignored. We pass laws to support the work of law enforcement across the state and provide justice for victims.

Continue reading “”

People, not guns, are the problem

One of the significant concerns held by the founders of our country was that the government not be allowed to get too big. Our system of government is constructed in such a fashion the people are in charge, not the elected politicians. The politicians are elected to do the will of the people.

The Second Amendment provides that citizens can freely possess firearms. The rationale is for citizens to be able to protect themselves from a government that grows too large. The Second Amendment has been under assault for many years. As the government has grown larger and larger, the pressure in Congress to abolish the personal ownership of arms has been increasing year after year.

The primary argument being pushed to abolish the Second Amendment is focused on civilian gun violence in our streets. Is it a problem? Absolutely. Is removing firearms from the hands of citizens the answer? In my opinion, this is the absolute wrong approach to gun violence in the street. Disarming good, responsible gun owners only gives the upper hand to those bent on doing mayhem in our communities.

The focus on removing gun violence from the streets must be concentrated on the people committing the shootings.

In my 83 times riding this rock we call Earth around the sun, I will raise my right hand and swear, I have never witnessed a gun jumping off the table, running into the street and shooting someone.

A gun is manufactured from metal, plastic, wood and a few other inanimate materials. Some are engraved with beautiful designs. Others are plain and simple. However, to my knowledge, there isn’t a firearm in the U.S.A. that has a brain of its own, has the ability to jump out of its place of storage, run out into the street, pick out a specific individual and shoot them.

The person holding the firearm is the cause of the shooting incident. It is the person who picks up this inanimate object, aims it, squeezes the trigger. And the firearm discharges as it was designed to do once it is in the hands of a person.

It is the person, not the firearm, that causes the shooting to occur.

Knives kill, cars kill, trucks kill, sledgehammers kill, bricks kill and any one of a hundred other inanimate objects used in a manner that results in death.

Where is the cry to eliminate any of these objects? There is none. Nada. Zip. Only deafening silence.

What we need to hear is support for reforming our seriously broken welfare system. Look at the statistics. Where is the highest majority of shooting crimes occurring? In the government housing projects and inner-city ghettos. Interestingly, all were created by government programs to, supposedly, lift people out of poverty. In reality, many of these programs were developed to assure a particular block of votes. It has worked.

Let’s use some of the millions of dollars spent, or should I say wasted each day, to build an education system that works. A system that teaches the young how to survive in the adult business world. Pride in heritage must be emphasized. Law and order brought to the neighborhood. Respect for each other and for people they meet in the future.

Will this fix it overnight? Absolutely not. This project will require thousands of hours and extreme dedication from the people working it even to give it a glimmer of a chance to work. I suspect some will be surprised at the amount of help that will come from the gun owner community. Once it is established, this is not another congressional “feel good” project.

The gun is not at fault; blame for misuse lies with the person holding the firearm.

Train young people to respect firearms and use them properly. Train young people to respect each other. Train young people to take responsibility for their actions. Train young people on the proper way to use a checkbook. Train young people on how to succeed in a work environment. Train up each new generation to leave things in a better condition than they found them.

Will the shootings go away? After a time, yes. Once the young people learn to respect others and themselves, the guns will stay in the drawer and no longer jump out to shoot someone.

Jim Ross Lightfoot
Former United States Representative from Iowa.

From the writings of St. George Tucker, I’d say it was centuries long

A Decades Long Relentless Attack on the Constitution

For decades our own government relentlessly has attacked the Constitution. Although gradual, there has been a continual wearing down of Constitutional limitations within government. Under the current administration the radical left would like to turn the Constitution into a living document. In that matter they could change whatever they wanted to.

They continue to disrespect the Constitution by removing the constraints that we conservatives hold dearly, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, 5^th Amendment, the 10^th Amendment, etc. The goal of the extreme left in the party is to elevate the US government into a national government with supreme authority controlled by the Democratic party.

For decades we have allowed the Congress who should be the enforcers of the Constitution to split ideologically. We now have a Congress that has irreconcilable ideological views on what the Constitution means regarding the federal power. If the liberal left gets their way the Constitution will change from limiting the power of the Federal government to empowering the Federal government over state’s rights.

Look at what is taking place in the country today under the Biden Administration. Progressives are trying to link the Constitution with slavery incorporating the 1619 project claiming that the war with England took place because the English wanted to end slavery in the colonies which is nothing close to the truth. A project disputed by numerous American historians. Because of the 1619 project they have created Critical Race Theory and deceive the American people through Woke identity politics.

According to the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, conservative Republicans who supported Trump are White Supremacists and the biggest threat to our Democracy. They have stopped the XL Pipeline taken our energy independence away from us laying off thousands allowing gas and heating fuel prices to double in six months.

Government is intervening to control private property extending a moratorium on rent evictions ignoring the Supreme Court and all property owners who have to pay mortgages, taxes, utilities, and bills. They are pushing to eliminate the Electoral College leaving small states at the mercy of large liberal states like California and New York.

In Washington DC they turned the National Guard into a petri dish for their progressive social ideology. Protect Washington, DC but let Portland, LA, Baltimore, Georgia, etc. burn. The damage to the Capital was minuscule compared to what took place in those cities. They have allowed the Defund the Police movement and have let crime run rapid within every major urban center in the country.

They are putting Covid restrictions on US citizens while allowing open boarders with thousands of illegal migrants into the country testing Covid positive while using taxpayer dollars to pay for temporary housing and travel expenses into the interior of the US without any obligation to become US citizens. They seek to stack the Supreme Court.

If successful they will usurp the interpretation of the Constitution as we know it subject to any changes they desire. They seek to nationalize voting over state’s rights leaving taxpayers at the mercy of those in power in Washington.

The ruling elites currently in power seek to create a deep state in the direction of socialism and dependency on government. Contrary to President Biden’s inaugural speech on unity the Democrats have escalated their politics of division. The radical left in the party hate the American way of life and is determined to destroy the Constitutional foundation that makes America the country we cherish. If you are a conservative we have to tell those in Congress this is not the right direction for the country.

William R. Bellotti
Middlebury, CT

An Open Letter to Joseph Robinette Biden, President of the United States of America

President Biden:

It gives me no pleasure to write to you today and publish this in a public forum, but circumstances dictate this will be the necessary vehicle for what I know will be the redress of grievances for many Americans like me.

I must inform you that you, sir, your Vice President, and your entire administration are unfit to govern this country.

The reasons why are legion, and I offer but a summary below, but each is clearly evident from your words and actions to date.

Your lies are brazen, and while Americans have come to expect both lying and brazenness from politicians, seldom have we seen a President who lies with the specific goal of producing harm.

You, sir, are that president.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:

I keep coming back to the idea that concentrating on rounding up the worst of the worst gangbangers would be much more efficient. By anybody’s count there are far fewer violent gang members operating in this country than there are guns. Would this get rid of all gun crime? No, but it would make a heck of a dent in it.

Take care of the demand problem and the supply side will surely slow.

Seems to me, she’s come to the same conclusion Bill Whittle did
“Maybe it’s not the guns. Maybe it’s the people holding the guns.”

Are guns really the problem?

The White House is launching a new assault to bring down the crime rate. As you’ve likely heard, crime, especially homicide, has exploded in many major hotspot cities over the past year or so. President Joe Biden says he knows what to do, he’s been at this for years and he’s got a plan ready to launch that includes several definitive steps.

“The first of those that work is stemming the flow of firearms used to commit violent crimes,” Biden told a group of reporters as he was about to go into a closed-door meeting with visiting police chiefs and city officials. “It includes cracking down and holding rogue gun dealers accountable for violating federal law.”

The new plan includes five new federal strike forces, agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATFE), which will embed with local police departments in Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. Their mission is to disrupt gun trafficking coming into those major cities.

The president says he wants to “supercharge” the crime fighting effort, so he’s also urging communities to invest some of their portion of the $350 billion COVID-19 relief fund in policing and to establish more support programs, such as summer jobs for young people.

I wonder if during that closed-door White House meeting anyone broached the subject of the criminals holding those illegal guns the president wants rounded up.

The cold hard fact is this: There are some 470 million guns in civilian hands in the United States right now, with new ones — including untraceable, homemade ghost guns — being manufactured every day. Legal, registered gun sales are at record highs. If by some stretch of the imagination we could magically do away with all the guns belonging to criminals, what do you think might happen? Do you believe hardcore lawbreakers would simply shrug, walk away from their criminal life and go get a nine-to-five job? No. They would find other weapons with which to inflict their terror on innocent citizens. Knives, Molotov cocktails, scissors, an ax perhaps. Criminals aren’t just violent; they are deviously creative.

Continue reading “”

Just to point out the intellectual level of some people who believe they’re making a salient point about a subject that anyone can easily determine they are totally clueless about

Letter: What does any of this have to do with the Second Amendment?
Portsmouth Herald

June 10 – To the Editor:

In the news the past month or so:

A 57-year old retired NYC police officer is shot accidentally by a friend trying to break up a dispute outside a pizza parlor.

A 6-year old boy, a passenger in his mother’s car, is shot in a road rage incident.

Another young boy, retrieving his bike from the sidewalk near his home, is shot by a neighbor.

Several dozen are killed or wounded over a weekend in gang-related shootouts in Chicago.

An 18-year old from Ohio is found carrying an AK-47 in a NYC subway.

A woman in Texas shoots a beauty shop owner in a dispute about the cost of her pedicure.

A 5-year old boy is accidentally shot by his mother who was aiming at a dog.

Eight people are killed in Atlanta, followed by shootings in a supermarket in Colorado, an office building in California, a FedEx office in Indianapolis, a rail yard in San Jose. A total of 39 people.

Somebody….anybody….Please! Can anyone tell me what any of this has to do with the Second Amendment?

Anthony McManus

Dover

Letter To The Editor O’ The Day

As civil unrest grows, guns are essential for protection

Missing the mark

To Jimmy Dorrell: Your thesis that Christians (so-called) often use the Bible and twist scripture to justify their own selfish desires is certainly true, but Texas’ constitutional carry law is not an example of this practice [May 30 op-ed]. Actual examples could include the church’s gradual acceptance of homosexuality, defense of abortion or justification of adultery, rampant divorce, cohabitation and fornication. You chose this more politically correct topic as your hard line on Biblical malpractice but I look forward to your subsequent pieces on the rest of the issues listed above. Regardless, your piece was a mischaracterization of the argument, and the events that you cited from scripture were in no way related to the conversation of self-defense or willfully twisting the Bible for our own selfish desires.

Second, you assert that Jesus’ own disciples twisted his words for their misguided desires but then you cite three seemingly random instances that have nothing to do with your premise. When James and John were arguing about who would be greatest, they were simply arguing what they wanted, not twisting anything they had heard from Jesus. Judas betrayed Jesus, but nothing more — he didn’t do so out of some misinterpretation of Jesus’ words. And Peter attacked an officer that was simply trying to arrest his teacher. There was no twisting of words, only Peter acting independently, out of anger and fear. Jesus even rebukes Peter, asking him, “Am I leading a rebellion?” He was not, and neither are your fellow constitutional carry countrymen.

Third, your arguments lack an understanding in the difference between vengeance, which is the Lord’s, and the protection of yourself and others, which is your responsibility as a man of God. A constitutional carry law simply ensures that everyone has the capacity to protect themselves against those that would do them harm.

“For greater love hath no man than this, that he would lay down his life for a friend” — John 15:3.

We need to be prepared to protect those around us, stranger or family, and we need to be willing to die for them. But throwing yourself in front of a bullet doesn’t mean much when there are 30 more behind the one that put you on the floor. You seem to be dismissive of the growing threats in this country, but as our collective conscience wanes and civil unrest grows, violence, whether perpetrated by a lone, mad gunman or a crazed mob, becomes more and more likely. Those of us who enjoy the right to constitutionally carry will peacefully stand by, and on the day when the forces of hell come crashing down, I hope that I’m nearby so that I might have the chance to protect the people that were put in your care.

Open Letter from Retired Generals and Admirals

Our Nation is in deep peril. We are in a fight for our survival as a Constitutional Republic like no other time since our founding in 1776. The conflict is between supporters of Socialism and Marxism vs. supporters of Constitutional freedom and liberty.

During the 2020 election an “Open Letter from Senior Military Leaders” was signed by 317 retired Generals and Admirals and, it said the 2020 election could be the most important election since our country was founded. “With the Democrat Party welcoming Socialists and Marxists, our historic way of life is at stake.” Unfortunately, that statement’s truth was quickly revealed, beginning with the election process itself.

Without fair and honest elections that accurately reflect the “will of the people” our Constitutional Republic is lost. Election integrity demands insuring there is one legal vote cast and counted per citizen. Legal votes are identified by State Legislature’s approved controls using government IDs, verified signatures, etc. Today, many are calling such commonsense controls “racist” in an attempt to avoid having fair and honest elections. Using racial terms to suppress proof of eligibility is itself a tyrannical intimidation tactic. Additionally, the “Rule of Law” must be enforced in our election processes to ensure integrity. The FBI and Supreme Court must act swiftly when election irregularities are surfaced and not ignore them as was done in 2020. Finally, H.R.1 & S.1, (if passed), would destroy election fairness and allow Democrats to forever remain in power violating our Constitution and ending our Representative Republic.

Aside from the election, the Current Administration has launched a full-blown assault on our Constitutional rights in a dictatorial manner, bypassing the Congress, with more than 50 Executive Orders quickly signed, many reversing the previous Administration’s effective policies and regulations. Moreover, population control actions such as excessive lockdowns, school and business closures, and most alarming, censorship of written and verbal expression are all direct assaults on our fundamental Rights.

We must support and hold accountable politicians who will act to counter Socialism, Marxism and Progressivism, support our Constitutional Republic, and insist on fiscally responsible governing while focusing on all Americans, especially the middle class, not special interest or extremist groups which are used to divide us into warring factions.
Additional National Security Issues and Actions:

• Open borders jeopardize national security by increasing human trafficking, drug cartels, terrorists entry, health/CV19 dangers, and humanitarian crises. Illegals are flooding our Country bringing high economic costs, crime, lowering wages, and illegal voting in some states. We must reestablish border controls and continue building the wall while supporting our dedicated border control personnel. Sovereign nations must have controlled borders.

• China is the greatest external threat to America. Establishing cooperative relations with the Chinese Communist Party emboldens them to continue progress toward world domination, militarily, economically, politically and technologically. We must impose more sanctions and restrictions to impede their world domination goal and protect America’s interests.

• The free flow of information is critical to the security of our Republic, as illustrated by freedom of speech and the press being in the 1st Amendment of our Constitution. Censoring speech and expression, distorting speech, spreading disinformation by government officials, private entities, and the media is a method to suppress the free flow of information, a tyrannical technique used in closed societies. We must counter this on all fronts beginning with removing Section 230 protection from big tech.

• Re-engaging in the flawed Iran Nuclear Deal would result in Iran acquiring nuclear weapons along with the means to deliver them, thereby upsetting Mideast peace initiatives and aiding a terrorist nation whose slogans and goals include “death to America” and “death to Israel” . We must resist the new China/Iran agreement and not support the Iran Nuclear Deal. In addition, continue with the Mideast peace initiatives, the “Abraham Accords,” and support for Israel.

• Stopping the Keystone Pipeline eliminates our recently established energy independence and causes us to be energy dependent on nations not friendly to us, while eliminating valuable US jobs. We must open the Keystone Pipeline and regain our energy independence for national security and economic reasons.

• Using the U.S. military as political pawns with thousands of troops deployed around the U.S. Capitol Building, patrolling fences guarding against a non-existent threat, along with forcing Politically Correct policies like the divisive critical race theory into the military at the expense of the War Fighting Mission, seriously degrades readiness to fight and win our Nation’s wars, creating a major national security issue. We must support our Military and Vets; focus on war fighting, eliminate the corrosive infusion of Political Correctness into our military which damages morale and war fighting cohesion.

• The “Rule of Law” is fundamental to our Republic and security. Anarchy as seen in certain cities cannot be tolerated. We must support our law enforcement personnel and insist that DAs, our courts, and the DOJ enforce the law equally, fairly, and consistently toward all.

• The mental and physical condition of the Commander in Chief cannot be ignored. He must be able to quickly make accurate national security decisions involving life and limb anywhere, day or night. Recent Democrat leadership’s inquiries about nuclear code procedures sends a dangerous national security signal to nuclear armed adversaries, raising the question about who is in charge. We must always have an unquestionable chain of command.

Under a Democrat Congress and the Current Administration, our Country has taken a hard left turn toward Socialism and a Marxist form of tyrannical government which must be countered now by electing congressional and presidential candidates who will always act to defend our Constitutional Republic. The survival of our Nation and its cherished freedoms, liberty, and historic values are at stake.
We urge all citizens to get involved now at the local, state and/or national level to elect political representatives who will act to Save America, our Constitutional Republic, and hold those currently in office accountable. The “will of the people” must be heard and followed.

Signed by: (names follow)

Continue reading “”

Carrying a gun saved my life

I write in response to the April 18 letter from Max Schreiber of Cedar Falls. He laments the recent gun laws in Iowa. He said the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment when firearms were single shot muzzle loaders. So, you are saying the only weapons that fall under the Second Amendment are ones in use in the 18th century? I guess that would also apply the First Amendment. This is the one that protects (not gives) your right to express your opinion. I would imagine you expressed it on a computer. Sorry, those weren’t around in the 18th century, so you had no right to express that opinion.

I will continue to carry weapons to protect me and my family. If that scares you I suggest you go to a safe room.

Jim Whitmer, Waterloo

Letter: There’s no historical basis for ban on ‘ghost guns’

In referring to the so-called ghost gun loophole, Steve Henshaw called the right to purchase nonfirearm materials for the purpose of manufacturing arms a travesty (“Tighten law on DIY guns,” Reading Eagle, March 20). The only travesty is the belief that others do not have an inherent right to self-defense, and that the right extends to the home manufacture of firearms, an activity that predates the American Revolution itself.

The only historical bases for banning individuals from possessing firearms and related products, e.g. gunpowder, were when those who would be or were in possession were a demonstrable threat to the safety of others, or where they were perceived as a threat due to their status as a racial minority, slave, or freedman — an actual travesty.

There is simply no constitutionally supported basis from precluding the manufacture of firearms — when the Supreme Court issued its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, it specified that the test for determining the constitutionality of gun laws was whether the law was supported by text, history and tradition; “ghost gun” bans are supported by none of them. People who are spooked by “ghost guns” perhaps should look behind the veil and address the actual crimes which they are being used to support, if any.

Logan D. Lecates

Hegins, Schuylkill County