Different conclusion

By From page A5 | March 01, 2013


This letter is in response to Barry Tyrrell’s letter published on Feb. 22, 2013. Mr Tyrrell, I beg to differ with your conclusion. If you want to look at the intent of the writers of the Second Amendment, that intent was to insure that the people always had the right to own weaponry needed to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. You think that since we have a professional military to defend us we don’t need the ability to defend ourselves. You couldn’t be more wrong. The U.S. military is under the control of the exact government that the Second Amendment grants us the right to defend ourselves against. You are being very naive if you think we can trust our government (i.e. people who have power) to never use their power to subdue law abiding citizens.

Here are a few topics you should Google for yourself: 1) The Battle of Athens Tennessee in 1946; 2) the unconstitutional gun confiscation that occurred in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina; 3) the current Military Litmus test for officers — would they be willing to fire on Americans; 4) the Federal government is currently buying billions of rounds of ammo; 5) China wants U.S. civilians disarmed.

Better to see the signs of the time and be prepared for what’s coming ahead rather than to be caught completely unaware and helpless.


Letters to the Editor

  • Recent Posts

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.