Letter to the Editor

Amendment’s intent

Arroyo GrandeFebruary 6, 2013 

The answer to the perplexing problem dealing with the National Rifle Association and guns must be to understand the Second Amendment and its intent. When written, the amendment was meant to preserve a viable militia in place of a large standing army, which those in Philadelphia in 1787 did not want to establish here. The Second Amendment’s only intent was to ensure a stable militia, and that those called up for duty were all suitably armed with their own guns and ammunition. Guns were an important part of life in those days, and no thought was given that a law would be necessary to protect this right.

The NRA uses its twisted interpretation of the Second Amendment to state that owning and acquiring guns was and is a constitutional right. This interpretation has been repeated time and time again. President Franklin D. Roosevelt stated, “Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth.”

The Supreme Courts of 1876, 1886 and 1939 all stated that the Second Amendment granted the people’s rights to bear arms only within the militia, which certainly makes sense.

There is, however, a need for a workable and intelligent solution to this deadly gun problem.

The Tribune is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service