Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

GUNS: We don’t have thought police yet

Letter by Dana Booth, Tacoma on Jan. 23, 2013 at 12:54 pm with No Comments »
January 24, 2013 9:28 am

Re: “NRA doesn’t protect people from crime – it protects weapons” (TNT, 1-22).

William Saletan of the leftist publication, Slate, slams the NRA for what he seems to believe are offenses against decent society. But the entire column is troubling from the standpoint of civil liberties.

According to Saletan, the “NRA doesn’t help the government prosecute accused criminals. It defends them.” This is fringe hyperbole.

The two examples that Saletan hangs his argument on are that both a person on the “terror watch list” and a person to whom a restraining order has been issued by a domestic partner are not denied firearms outright.

First, the terror watch list is just that, a watch list. I’m sure most of them are very bad, others, probably, yet others are there by mistake. Also, who hasn’t heard of folks being wrongly accused by partners of certain things, simply for positioning purposes?

The troubling thing about Saletan’s column is that he seems to buy into the notion that people should be denied constitutional rights, not for the things they do, but for what they might be thinking about doing (and this according to whom?).

Last I looked, we’re still a partially free country, and peddling this sort of thinking is dangerous. Also troubling was the ease at which these thoughts seem to have been penned by a fringe left progressive, as though the Constitution is simply an irritance to “reasonable” people.

Leave a comment Comments
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0