We can, and should, stop the bloodshed
To the Editor:
Letter-writer Dave Waldrop (SMN, May 25 edition) asked: “What is the cost of mass murder?” The next day, in another local newspaper, the same writer asked: “Why ignore a part of the Second Amendment?”
Both are excellent questions; however, his under-informed critics seem mainly interested in muddying the waters with capricious descriptions of what constitutes an assault weapon adding their vacillating opinions and interpretations of the Second Amendment.
Pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but (technology aside) younger generations seem painfully bereft of knowledge of our heritage, American history, the founders’ intent and the Constitution they produced. I often wonder if American history is still being taught in public schools.
Whether it is or not, the fact (“something that actually exists; reality; truth”) remains, the United States is the only industrialized and (supposedly) civilized nation on earth to generate and then allow to continue unabated the slaughter of its children and innocent men and women.
Let us begin with one absolute fact. The Second Amendment was originally adopted so that Congress could not disarm a state militia, assuring the preservation of the “citizen soldier.” It was never intended as a guarantee (as some people would have you believe) of a citizens’ right to keep and bear arms free from government restrictions. Because the Supreme Court has never found the Second Amendment to be within the meaning of the 14th Amendment’s due process clause, each state has the authority to limit its citizens’ rights to keep and bear arms.
Related Items
Finding middle ground is a must
Haywood commissioners get earful on 2A sanctuary status
Shooting victim’s mother opposes gun resolution
Macon considers Second Amendment proposal
Keep in mind, the founders could not have foreseen life in 21st century America. They wrote the Constitution on the foundation of known history and based on the knowledge and experiences possessed in their era.
Because the Supreme Court has ruled on only a handful of cases regarding the Second Amendment, and because the wording of the Second Amendment is vague and subject to a wide variety of interpretations and meaning, it is reasonable to assume the gun-control debate will not be settled anytime soon.
So, we are left with wealthy gun manufacturers and others who profit from the sale of guns and a Congress anxious to be counted as benefactors of unrestricted gun ownership, therefore the massacre of our citizens will very likely continue unabated into the future.
It is up to us to stop the bloodshed (if it can be stopped) and to decide what kind of a nation we want to be. Or, we can remain apathetic about it all. Apathy ... according to the Irish dramatist, critic and novelist George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950), is “the worst sin toward our fellow creatures.” We do have choices in the matter, people.
David L. Snell
Franklin
