Monday, December 9, 2013
By Ken Maclean, a resident of Scarborough
In regard to the April 23 Another View, "No gun law reform would change the trend of violence":
I found it so objectionable in so many ways.
First: The author (like so many others) presents himself as a constitutional scholar and lectures us on the precise meaning of the Second Amendment (as interpreted by the National Rifle Association).
He goes on to expound upon the separation of powers and concludes that the Senate vote "failed to violate" the Constitution. I see it as a dereliction of duty.
My last beef is with the leap to "society is to blame" and that it's a waste of effort and somehow unconstitutional to try to make it more difficult to carry out the 40 percent of gun transactions that avoid background checks and to reduce the number of bullets that can be loaded into a gun at one time. It is common sense in its purest form!
It might not have prevented the Newtown massacre, but it might have saved a few of the lives lost there to a shooter who was able to shove a 30-shot magazine into his rifle.
The line of thinking that somehow any move to make it a safer world for gun owners and non-gun owners alike is a threat to our Second Amendment rights is erroneous.
Read it again, sir -- it is not a blank check.
Update: This guest editorial was updated to add the name of the author.