Letter: Guns and the 2nd Amendment

May 6, 2013 

In 2008 the Supreme Court ruled that “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,” was unconnected to “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” I don’t remember any conservatives complaining about constitutional reinterpretation or limitations on state’s rights,  because they got what they wanted: extremely limited gun control. The end justified the means! How hypocritical.

The words of the Second Amendment are still intact,  and, considering  court approval of the sawed-off shotgun ban, could support a requirement that to “keep and bear” assault weapons, you must be a qualified, active member of a militia, i.e. national guard, or state or local police force. They already have background checks in place.

Why does this idea raise thoughts of Don Quixote tilting with a(n NRA) windmill?

— Jon Sharpe

Anchorage

 

 

 

Anchorage Daily News is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service