We all have our opinions on the necessity for some sort of actual solution to our ever growing gun violence problem.
I have mine of which few will probably agree….but that is your problem….I wanted to help my readers understand what others are saying beyond the chatter from the ‘reliable sources’…..
I will re-post various op-eds from around the country to let my readers know what others are thinking…..
Do you have the right to a gun? Yes. A constitutional right? No.
Fealty to the American myth of unrestricted gun ownership has run its course. Too many children have died. Try a lawyer’s perspective instead. You have the right to own a gun, but it’s not a constitutional right. Politicians beholden to the National Rifle Association bloviating about the liberal elite coming to take our guns in violation of our “Second Amendment constitutional rights” are nauseating. Shut up, Sen. Ted Cruz. No one believes that.
Why not first read the Second Amendment? It says, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/commentary/story/2022-06-03/second-amendment-gun-rights
Please keep in mind that these are NOT my thoughts….I may or may not agree, this is just an FYI exercise…..hopefully all will see as such and not go off on some rant filled rant that will serve no purpose at all.
Any thoughts?
On a closing note: Today we celebrate the 78th anniversary of the D-Day invasion of Fortress Europe.
Please take a few minutes to thank our Greatest Generation for all their sacrifice.
Watch This Blog!
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
In Saner Thought 
A time when a “musket” would take a minute to re-load…not the mass killing devices of today. An intelligent approach that respects rights while addresses the issue is sadly not likely.
I agree….if we want to be subjective then update the amendment to fit today’s world. chuq
Clearly I disagree with the Op-Ed. It is indeed a Constitutional Right. Further, for all the references to muskets, the Frames knew well of multiple shot firearms being not merely invented at that time, but marketed to various governments.
We have a ‘militia’ the Nat Guard…..I just think that the 2nd does not fir. Be well chuq
Not according to the Militia Act…..
Then we need to get rid of the NG if they are not needed to protect. chuq
Maybe. I should have clarified previously, that the NG is the “organized Militia”…..there is also the “unorganized Militia”. Per 10 U.S. Code § 246 – Militia: composition and classes
WE do not need an unorganized militia…that is just an armed camp….chuq
It’s an armed Citizenry. I view that notion as a net positive (while acknowledging that our society is becoming less and less capable of that responsibility).
Then I feel that NatGuard is not needed except as replacement parts for war losses. chuq
Sure, except for the humanitarian and disaster support the NG consistently does.
That can be handled by others. chuq
“Well regulated”. No one can say gun ownership in this country is well regulated, regardless of your stance.
Good point Maggie…thanx for your thoughts chuq
There is no “well-regulated” militia. The National Guard fills that void, and I don’t remember any of the mass shooters being part of the National Guard. Most would be deemed mentally unfit to handle weapons in the first place.
Another good point…..I appreciate your thoughts on this….there are more op-eds I will be posting. Be well chuq
You know my thoughts on this all too well, chuq.
Best wishes, Pete.
Yes I do and I appreciate them chuq