Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

Tag: Second Amendment


GUNS: I-594 conflicts with our natural rights

Re: ”About 1,000 gun owners rally against Initiative 594 in Olympia” (TNT, 12-14).

I am appalled at the lack of education displayed by some of the comments online. One commenter states we live in a democracy, and the minority must comply with the wishes of the majority no matter what that majority approves.

The founders of this country stated they created a republic, not a democracy. They knew democracy devolves to where three wolves and two sheep can vote on what to have for dinner.

The well-educated speakers at the “Will Not Comply” Initiative 594 rally made it clear that legislation

Read more »


GUNS: Background check is a reasonable limit

The Second Amendment 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.

That language is concise, precise and debatable on what those ol’ guys meant.

The U.S. Supreme Court has since ruled it is not an unlimited right, allowing the federal, state and local governments to infringe on “the people’s right.” So in essence we have “the people” and we have the unworthy.

I feel Initiative 594 is our right to impose a sensible infringement of “the peoples right” through background checks

Read more »


PROTEST: Why we have a Second Amendment

Re: “Feds end controversial cattle roundup in Nevada” (TNT, 4-13).

Whether you agree or disagree with Cliven Bundy’s rights to graze his cattle on land his family has maintained and used before the Bureau of Land Management existed, you have to be impressed by the individuals who chose to arm themselves and peacefully protest/block the U.S. government’s seizure of his cattle.

Armed protesters on horseback blocked the BLM’s seizure of Bundy’s cattle. These same armed protesters assisted in the BLM’s decision to return already seized cattle.

This is a classic example of why we have a Second Amendment. We

Read more »


GUNS: Our toxic divide seems to be getting worse

I am surely not the only one fatigued by the interminable letters about guns, each side talking past and ignoring the arguments of the other. What has happened to the old-fashioned ethic of seeking consensus? Our toxic political divide just seems to get worse and worse.

I am even more tired of gun rights advocates who insist on leaving out half of the Second Amendment as if it doesn’t exist: “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.”

Whatever one’s position,

Read more »


GUNS: All gun sales should be vetted

Yet another writer defends uncontrolled access to guns in America (letter, 5-9), reiterating the argument that we should “put the bad guy in jail” instead of making new laws that would put “good people” in jail.

I presume he means those good people jailed for selling guns without vetting the purchaser. Gun owners should be able to sell guns to anyone they please without being encumbered by concerns that the purchaser is a raving lunatic bent on visiting death upon, say, kids in the local elementary school.

This is absurd. The writer and the NRA rant about enforcing existing

Read more »


GUNS: Background check is just common sense

Re: “Gun background checks may see ballot” (TNT, 4-29).

Asking for a background check on someone who is trying to purchase a gun seems like common sense. I am unsure as to why one would be opposed to such a thing in the first place.

I don’t know whether it is the fear of being on a “government list,” in which case I do not believe that the government is so weak that it needs people to buy guns to create some sort of list. If the government wants to track a citizen down, it has the power to

Read more »


GUNS: Be careful about backing initiative

Re: “Gun background checks may see ballot” (TNT, 4-29).

The question every person should ask is whether enhancing background checks benefit the public without infringing upon our rights.

To this I say yes, but only to a point. A person being sold a gun is being trusted with a weapon of great killing potential. Society deserves a chance to make sure that person can be trusted with it.

But just as you cannot arrest someone for a crime they may commit, background and foreground checks need to be reasonably limited.

Just as a poor credit report excludes those who

Read more »


GUNS: 2nd Amendment wasn’t an afterthought

In the early 1980s, Nancy Reagan started the “Just say no to drugs” program. Now two states have legalized marijuana. At the same time, laws were just starting to favor gay rights but same-sex marriages were a dream. Now several states have laws allowing same-sex marriage.

Whatever your position, these changes did not happen overnight. It was a slow, methodical progression of legal battles, minor victories and a change in public opinion. Now we have gun-control being fought over, specifically  addressing background checks. No one can understand the NRA’s feverish fight over something so small, but it is the first

Read more »