- Al Sharpton, Trayvon Martin’s parents rally against Fla. ‘stand your ground’ law
- Hillary Clinton campaign got illicit funds from D.C. scandal figure
- Obama administration backs off plan to cut prescription-drug program
- Tickets linked to stolen passports purchased by Iranian middleman
- More than 3,500 police planned for Boston Marathon
- Ottawa day care suspends 2-year-old for ‘outside’ cheese sandwich
- Liam Neeson tells NYC mayor to ‘man up’ in horse carriage fight
- Real-life Dr. Doolittle to reveal how to talk to animals
- Climate change could bring back smallpox, researchers say
- Shoe-bomb witness to speak from London at N.Y. trial
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Second Amendment is inviolable
In his “Political Theater” column Jan. 14 (“Why you’re right to hate both parties”) Joseph Curl uses examples of “two horrible things” to illustrate why he hates both political parties. I believe, however, his example of why he currently hates the Republican Party is flawed.
Mr. Curl brings up the tragic Sandy Hook Elementary School school shooting and the Aurora, Colo., theater shooting. He writes that both shooters were carrying AR-15s, a civilian version of an M-16, the war weapon of choice for many years, and that in the Colorado incident, the shooter had a 100-round magazine. Mr. Curl agrees with the Democrats that these guns and all like them should be outlawed because no one needs an AR-15 to hunt rabbits, and the fact that they can do such damage in the hands of the wrong people outweighs any right to own them.
This argument fails to hold water for several reasons. First of all, our rights are not given to us by the government, so it is not for the government to take them away, or in any way whittle them down to what one party or another deems reasonable. Second, if these kinds of weapons don’t belong in the hands of certain people, who will decide what people should or should not own them? On what factors will this decision be based?
Finally — and most importantly — the sole purpose of the Second Amendment is to allow citizens to hold weapons necessary to defend themselves against their government, to form militias and fight to preserve their constitutional rights should the elected government encroach on them. The men who crafted our founding documents had spent most of their lives under the authority of a king. In school they had learned of the English civil war and in America they had lived through the Revolutionary War. They knew about runaway governments that trampled people’s rights and freedoms, and they believed that every citizen had a right to defend against attempts at despotism. We should take that right very seriously and defend it vigorously. History can turn on the number of rounds in a magazine.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
TWT Video Picks
By David Keene
Conference showed that the values Reagan cherished still endure
Get Breaking Alerts
- FCC targets black conservative in TV station fight
- Hillary Clinton campaign received funds from Jeffrey Thompson
- Kim Jong-un calls for execution of 33 Christians
- Senate Democrats, Republicans spar over restoring unemployment benefits
- Unanimous Senate passes bill on military sex assault to give victims more say in prosecution
- 80 people publicly executed across North Korea for films, Bibles
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Bill Clinton poses for photo with Bunny Ranch prostitutes
- Sharyl Attkisson resigns from CBS after months of talks
- Liam Neeson tells NYC mayor to 'man up' in horse carriage fight
- EDITORIAL: Senate Democrats’ pointless all-night global warming talkathon
- EDITORIAL: Enforce the Law Act aims to hold Obama accountable
- EDITORIAL: Relief from 'homeowners association nightmares'
- EDITORIAL: Lawyers encouraging pursuit of jackpot justice
- EDITORIAL: As jobs vanish, Obama wants more of same