Fifty-nine dead and over 500 wounded. A bad day on the battlefield in Afghanistan? No, just another bad day on the streets at home.

The arguments are tired. I’ve heard them all. Our country is awash with firearms. They don’t preserve civil order. The sheer numbers and capacity of them threatens civil order. That fact has to be on the mind of all law enforcement officers whenever they go out on a call. 

What kind of firepower will I encounter?

The National Rifle Association says “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” They say it is mental illness that’s the problem, but we don’t take care of the mentally ill in this country and we now have a president who calls them “sick losers.” How does that help?

We have a president who finds every point of division in our culture whether it is guns, race, religion, gender or class and rubs salt in it for his own political profit. After four years of Trump, we won’t be a nation, we’ll be pieces of a nation.

The founding fathers would be horrified to know that the Second Amendment to the Constitution was being interpreted to sanction laws that enable mass murder of civilians. Horrified. The Second Amendment was intended to enable militias, the only “standing” military of that time.

I don’t want to listen to the NRA arguments anymore. I’ve heard their empty clichés. They need to address the father of an 8-year-old girl in Connecticut who was slaughtered in her classroom at Newtown. When I saw him on television, his entire body was literally shaking with grief as he spoke of his daughter’s precious life. Quivering like an impressionistic painting. The NRA zealots need to look him in the eye and tell him, “we’re sorry about your kid, but that’s just the price we have to pay for the Second Amendment.”

We will light more candles, speak well of the dead, honor the heroes, support the wounded, sing “Amazing Grace,” and lower the flag to half-staff. We’ll talk about resiliency and healing, and nothing will change and it will happen again. And again. And again.

A great poet once said of America, “the stars on your flag are bullet holes.” Was he right?

 

Marty Ansley

Cinebar

 

Letters Policy

• Limit letters to the editor to 500 words or less.

• Include the town where you live and a daytime telephone number.

• The Chronicle does not publish letters that advocate boycotts of local businesses.

• Emailed letters are preferred. Send to letters@chronline.com

• Letters may be mailed to Letters, The Chronicle, 321 N. Pearl St., Centralia, WA. 98531 or dropped off at The Chronicle’s front desk.

Recommended for you

(11) comments

FrankInFL

The 2nd's prefatory phrase about the militia was not a rationale; it was an excuse: "You want a reason why the people need arms? OK, here's one: you can't have a militia unless Joe Sixpack knows which end of the gun is the dangerous end."

SCOTUS in "DC v Heller (2008)" affirmed that the right to keep and bear arms (RKBA) was NOT connected to militia service. Although the final decision was 5-4, the court was unanimous (9-0) that RKBA was an individual right and not a right of states or militias.

"US v Cruickshank (1876)" likewise notes that RKBA does not derive from the Constitution, but is inherent to the human condition.

"US v Miller (1936)" holds that the 2nd specifically protects arms suitable for military service. Mull that for a moment: 'Miller' says that M-16s are protected but AR-15s are not. Hmmm...

'Annoyance' is being replaced by 'grudging admiration' at the progressive left's impressive capacity for self-delusion.

An additional benefit is that I no longer have to shake my head and mutter "How can anyone be that stupid?" It's not stupidity; it's willful ignorance. And here I thought that was only a problem with the conservative right! Live and learn...

jsmith5893

Re: " The Second Amendment was intended to enable militias, the only “standing” military of that time."

No - the Preamble to the Bill of Rights states the reason for the 2nd Amendment is to "prevent a misconstruction or abuse" of govt powers & to realistically prevent or deter such an event from occurring, the 10 USC 311 unorganized militia of today should have the same firearms as the current US military.

jsmith5893

Re" The sheer numbers and capacity of them threatens civil order"

With an estimated 109 million gun owners with 400 million guns and billions or trillions of rounds of ammunition - if legal gun owners "threatened civil order", you would know it.

jsmith5893

Re: " I don’t want to listen to the NRA arguments anymore...They need to address the father of an 8-year-old girl..."

Yes let's make decisions based on emotions rather than facts. Mention that during the voir dire process next time you are called for jury duty

jsmith5893

Re: " They say it is mental illness"

Well the guns aren't the problem. The first semi-automatic handgun was invented in the late 1800’s and the most popular version went into production in 1911. It is also noted the so-called evil “assault rifles” with standard capacity 30 round magazines are not new technology. A harbinger was invented in 1890 and the current versions evolved and were mass produced in the late 1940’s and have always been available to the public (note the “47” in AK-47 stands for 1947, the year the firearm went into production). As a matter of fact fully automatic versions (i.e. machine guns), which are true military grade rifles, were readily available to the general public until 1986 and background checks on firearm transfers weren’t required until 1994 - yet nobody talks about mass shootings with any version (semi-automatic or automatic) of these guns during the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s so it’s a relatively new phenomenon and logic would indicate it’s being caused by something else.

BigBird

Well said.

ramrodd

The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the state,
is absolute. He does not derive it from the government. It is one of the
high powers delegated directlyto the citizen, and 'is excepted out of the
general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon
or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the
law-making power. (Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex.394, at 401-402)

ramrodd


The TRUTH about the "supremacy clause" - our Constitution does not delegate to the government authority to restrict our arms, ammunition, regulate firearms dealers, do background checks, etc.

https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/?s=The+TRUTH+about+the+%22supremacy+clause

ramrodd

why am i the only one trying to post?
exactly how moderated is this site??

ELSTINCO

Re: Title

No, they wouldn't. The public understanding of the people's right to arms rested on the fact that there were no differences between military arms and civilian arms. Arms WERE military arms. They are the only kind of arms that existed, which means that the people fully expected to be armed in parity with a standing military.

Sorry if that puts a hole in your canoe, but that's the fact, Jack.

sevenup

Mister Ansley.....There is nobody that abhors violence, murders, robbery, beatings, and illicit weaponry use more than I do. Your comments I must say are very interesting at best although I honestly cannot see or understand the reason that supports your thought process. You state that you have experienced the viewing of those that have suffered from violence at the hands of a perpetrator for whatever the reason might be. It is sad admittedly but how sad would it be if those that were perpetrators were numbered in the millions as is the case in many third world countries that have no way to defend themselves. You are suggesting that we remove the guns that actually are being used to protect American citizens even though the end results would be as is happening in third world countries now. Criminals will always have weaponry as they even today have. They are a sick degenerate part of society. They will never change..but..they can be neutralized to a degree by the use of what ever tools is necessary to [ guns etc]...as needed by those in authority and by our citizens. Evil things need to be fought against and good things need to be fought for...is your family worth fighting for?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.