The Constitution, Unlike A Driver's License, Isn't Revokable

Advertisement

by Van Carlson
payson
I would like to comment on your gun control editorial of Dec. 3.


As a native Arizonan of over 50 years and a Gila County resident for over 25, I never thought I'd see the day that the Roundup would come out for gun control. I know your paper hasn't been locally owned for many years, but I never realized how infiltrated we are with left-coasters and flatlanders.


I suggest you check your Brady Law facts with someone other than the Associated Press.


Your publisher and editorial staff obviously don't understand the difference between a Constitutional Amendment and a statute. Comparing driver's licenses and the right to keep and bear arms is like comparing apples and garbage cans.


Driver's licenses, depending on individual opinion, may or may not improve public safety. The 2nd Amendment is a completely different ball of wax. It was written after careful consideration and debate along with the others. It has to do with public safety all right, the safety of our entire society and culture based on individual freedoms. The Constitution merely states these rights that were understood by the people to be irrevocable.


It's disturbing to realize how many people either ignore or don't understand the Constitution and why it was written.


If the government tried to alter, tax or restrict the 1st Amendment, I don't think there is any question what you and the rest of the media would do. There would be a shrill scream heard around the world in minutes. Sometimes the price of freedom is high.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.