Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: Second Amendment’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Dec. 18 2012 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Utah_1
Salt Lake City, UT

Utah Constitution Article I, Section 6. [Right to bear arms.]
"The individual right of the people to keep and bear arms for security and defense of self, family, others, property, or the state, as well as for other lawful purposes shall not be infringed; but nothing herein shall prevent the Legislature from defining the lawful use of arms. "

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Well said Kathleen. As I and others have said elsewhere, this discussion is about how to prevent more mass murders..not how to take away peoples 2nd amendment rights (although 300million guns in America is insanity)..but I digress. Semi-automatic rifles with high capacity magazines have only one purpose and that is to committ mass killing. Gun supporters here is what you have to defend...a citizens need to have a gun whos intent is mass killing.

Sal
Provo, UT

I lived in Israel for a decade where every citizen over the age of 18 was armed. Israelis carry Uzi sub-machine guns in public. A mass murder doesn't happen there because all are armed.Only a terrorist rocket can kill innocents in that country today.

Criminals will always have assault weapons. How can a law-abiding citizen defend himself against an assault carrying criminal? The police arrived quickly at the Sandy Hook school, but to no avail.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

I say only allow assault rifles to be sold to Military, Police or Veterans of both.
We've had the proper training.

Keep them out of the hands of the general public.

Grundle
West Jordan, UT

"The man who would choose security over freedom deserves neither."

Thomas Jefferson

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Sal
Provo, UT
I lived in Israel for a decade where every citizen over the age of 18 was armed. Israelis carry Uzi sub-machine guns in public.

=========

Except to forgot to mention what I just said --
ISRAEL has a 100% mandatory Military requirement.

If you want an assault weapon,
enlist in the Military.
And get the proper training.

It's FREE - and they'll even pay you $600 a month for enrolling to learn it too!

Mom of 8
Hyrum, UT

Well said, Ms. Iker. Thank you for explaining the situation without the normal knee-jerk rhetoric.

@Sal--Israel is different than the US in one major aspect: every person is required to serve in the military where they learn respect for weapons, how to read a situation, and when to use those weapons in a judicious manner.

Americans aren't nearly as disciplined. Whereas Israelis are protected their nation, Americans tend to protect their own self-interests. It's a world of difference, and therefore, an inappropriate comparison.

People with guns tend to become their own police force and worse, sometimes become judge, jury, and executioner within moments of happening upon a situation.

I would never trust myself with so much power over life and death, and I trust my neighbors even less.

one old man
Ogden, UT

What's really frightening in all this debate is the number of people whose paranoia leads them to try to warn sane people of the need to be ready to defend ourselves from our own government.

I'm sorry, but thinking like that is dangerous.

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

As the Constitution explains, the right to bear arms was initially meant to arm a well-regulate militia to preserve our freedom. In those days, the government didn't supply the weapons to the rag-tag militia it raised in emergencies. People brought their own weapon to defend their country.

Nowadays, many interpret the second amendment to mean that we need to arm ourselves to the teeth to protect ourselves FROM government, not to help protect government (us) from outside threats. These are probably the same people who want to secede from the nation. Methinks they are missing the point.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Excellent comment, Kent. Thank you for a sensible post here.

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT

Less filling...Tastes great.

When the "discussion" begins with defending your "rights"...there is no discussion.

Rocky Raab
Ogden, UT

Muzzleloading muskets WERE the "assault rifle" of colonial times. They were the issued military arms of the day, so today's guns are no different. If you claim that the Second Amendment only applies to muskets, then the First Amendment freedom of the press only applies to manually operated printing presses and freedom of speech only applies to verbal communication.

Now to intent: Despite what you may think the founding fathers meant by including the right to bear arms, the writings of the day by those same men show that the intent was indeed to protect the people FROM a tyrannical government. That was precisely what the American Revolution was about, you know.

Gun control as practiced by most governments has nothing whatever to do with public safety, it has to do with preventing an overthrow of their own power. It is people control. Cuba has strict gun control. Venezuela has strict gun control. Hussein's Iran had strict gun control. The USSR had strict gun control. Every tyranny known has strict gun control. When the US government decides it wants strict gun control, that's the main reason why it should never happen.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

To a liberal, any gun is an assault rifle. If you want to really confuse them, ask them how it was possible for Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin and Mao ste Tung to murder millions of UNARMED citizens of their own country? They will just give you a blank stare because they can not comprehend the obvious connections between secular progressivism, moral relativism and these murdering dictators.

no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

He and his family came to America from Europe in 1700. They keep their only weapon, a rifle hung on one of the timbers, in their small cabin. The rifle is used to kill animals to feed his family. The rifle is also there and available should the family be threatened by animals or other human beings with ill intent.

The family moved into their lovely home in 2012. They felt they needed a larger home with the nicer "extras" . They purchased the large, beautiful, rare wood gun cabinet, with lovely etched glass, and locking doors. They had numerous guns to display. Some very rare, some very powerful that were to be used in wartime. The family, who were members of the local gun club, were very proud to display these weapons. The family had strong feelings about protecting themselves, especially in their lovely new home.

While visiting with this family one afternoon, there was an interruption. Following the mother's brief absence, she appeared, quite upset and angry telling the visitors, that she had to go to the high school. again. Her son had been giving them a great deal of trouble.

Second amendment meant for____?

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

...and to think of all those "2nd Amendment Remedies" Sharron Angle types the GOP elected via the Tea-Party.
...Carl Wimmer flashing his pistol at the State Capitol,
...Sarah Palin and her website targets,

...and then people wonder why the GOP looses more and more credibility when a nut guns down 20 little kids at school.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

nice try, but the second amendment is subject to more weaseling self serving interpretation than the bible.

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

I think gun nuts should go play paintball. What I learned is that in a room full of guns it's very easy to get dead. And you'll have bruises all over.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Constitutional Amendments can be repealed and the second Amendment should be repealed.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

You there's a great book about the decline of violence in the world and why it has happened. As part of that discussion the book references a historical study that showed that most of the rest of the civilized world has less violence and fewer personal guns because of a long societal maturation process where citizens learned to trust their democracys and governments. As trust grew the need for citizens need to defend themselves declined (we're not talking about nazis or communist regimes). On the other hand America went very quickly from an infant democracy to a full grown nation with no time for maturation..therefore much of America still thinks of itself as needing to rely on personal defense and there is still an enormous amount of distrust of government. This thread is a text book of such thought. In reality the distrust and libertarianism is symptomatic of a very immature democracy..but so be it. Fortunately America is growing up..that's why conservatism is showing itself to be so out of touch with reality.

Noodlekaboodle
Millcreek, UT

@Mountanman
What about the UK. They seriously restricted citizen gun access for all but antiques in 1997. Australia has some of the strictest gun laws on the planet. I'm not saying we need to go as far as they did. But do you really think the UK and Australia really fit in the same category as Mao's China or Communist Russia or Nazi Germany?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments