LETTERS

Gun rights activists misinterpret Second Amendment

Posted 8/23/22

To the Editor,

When the U.S. Congress was drafting, debating and ratifying the Second Amendment back in the late 1700s, they could have never imagined the advances in technology, weaponry and …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
LETTERS

Gun rights activists misinterpret Second Amendment

Posted

To the Editor,


When the U.S. Congress was drafting, debating and ratifying the Second Amendment back in the late 1700s, they could have never imagined the advances in technology, weaponry and warfare that comprise our current arsenal of state-of-the-art defense artillery. They used muskets, pistols and cannons! It is absurd to try to make any type of reasonable comparison to these incomparable eras and their means of defense.

Nowhere in its verbiage does the Amendment ‘grant’ anybody anything. Like all amendments, it simply is either declaratory or restrictive. None are absolutes. Historically, these founding documents typically deferred to the states for further interpretation.

In the aftermath of over 300 mass shootings in 2022, we briefly keep gun control conversations front and center, but these are short-lived and nothing meaningful transpires. It’s unfortunate that most gun rights advocates continue to draw such a hard, uncompromising line about the Second Amendment when they could advocate for stricter gun laws. As our fourth U.S. President James Madison eloquently stated, “There can be no true and lasting happiness without domestic tranquility; the sense of peace that comes with knowing that you, your family and your citizenry live in safety.” Maybe his words will remind our legislators of this basic human right and create a sense of urgency for passing sensible gun laws.


Dyanna Morrison White

Providence


Dyanna Morrison White has been an ardent student of The Constitution and The Bill of Rights for over 20 years and is the playwright/author of The Justice Trilogy series of stage plays published in book format [Justice (2020/2021) on First Amendment rights, Liberty (2021) on Second Amendment abuses/protections, with the final trilogy installment in research.] She lives in Providence, RI.

letters, editorial

Comments

1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • umpwuggly

    The Founders didn't have to imagine new technology, they understood human nature. The State Delegates that debated the Bill of Rights realized that the individual knows what is right for themselves and didn't require a big federal government. That's why as you state the Amendments are "either declaratory or restrictive", the restrictions are on the Government they were creating, not on the Citizens.

    That "We the People of the United States" in the preamble tells you where the power lies.

    Article 1 Section 1 starts with "All legislative Powers herein granted". Granted? Granted by who? Why We the People of course. The United States is unique in the Government power structure. The Citizen is the one with power, not the Government. As described in the Declaration of Independence your Rights are given to the individual by their Creator, not Government.

    The Government is there to secure the Rights on the Citizen and the Founders wanted to be sure the Citizens, if necessary would able to protect themselves against a destructive Government and "alter or abolish" that Government.

    The criminals need to be punished for their acts, not the good Citizens for their belief in Independence and Freedom.

    Thursday, August 25, 2022 Report this