Your guide to making money in the multi-billion dollar marijuana industry
| Own your ow legal marijuana business | Your guide to making money in the multi-billion dollar marijuana industry |
| Carl Olsen's Marijuana Archive |
Disarm America?
Should we repeal Second Amendment
Gun debate
On Dec.28 the Register published an Iowa View essay by Ivan T. Webber, a Des Moines attorney, in response to the murders of schoolchildren in Kentucky that the Second Amendment be repealed. "Even talking about repeal will at least move the discussion to the right arena," Webber wrote. These letters are a beginning of that discussion. - Editor.
If Ivan T. Webber wants to see twisting and
perversion of fact, he need look no further than his diatribe of Dec. 23 calling for
repeal of the Second Amendment. As an NRA member, sportsman and responsible gun
owner, I don't appreciate his loose play with the facts or being labeled a
"lackey."
It's just selected sound bites from a spin doctor or, in this case, a
spin shyster trying to sway opinion in his favor. If Webber wants to have
"discussion," he'll have to see and understand the whole truth, not only
half-truths that support his position. It's not the NRA this country should fear,
it's people like Webber who are arrogant enough to think they have the right to edit the
Constitution to suit their particular position on an issue.
-- Scoff W. McIntire,
1602 E. 148 St. S., Grinnell.
It never ceases to amaze me how elected officials and
lawyers can do their jobs with such a limited understanding of our Constitution. Ivan T.
Webber is a perfect example. He claims that the answer to the problem of people
being killed with guns is to repeal the Second Amendment.
Our founding fathers understood the need for an armed citizenry, not
only so they could defend their lives and property from thieves, but also so they could
defend themselves from government tyranny. They understood that their right to keep
and to bear arms was inalienable, and not a right granted to them by the Constitution.
That is why they did not give the federal government that authority. Repealing the
Second Amendment would not give them that authority. That would require another
amendment.
The prospect of repealing the Second Amendment is noxious to begin
with. One might as well solve the problem of deaths caused by drunken drivers by
banning cars.
Clearly the solution is not to take away the means of self-defense from
law-abiding citizens. The answer is to punish those who abuse their rights, and make
their punishment swift, sure and severe; something it presently is not.
-- D. J. Schachtner,
209 W. Main, Marshalltown.
Gun ban is constitutional
For years the NRA has told people that gun-control
laws violate the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. But this is simply not
true.
As a matter of law, the meaning of the Second Amendment was settled in
United States vs. Miller in 1939. Miller was convicted of carrying a sawed-off
shotgun across state lines in violation of the National Firearms Act of 1935. He
appealed his conviction on the basis of the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court, in
rejecting Miller's appeal, wrote that the "obvious purpose" of the Second
Amendment was "to assure the continuation and effectiveness of the state
militia" and that "the Amendment must be interpreted and applied with that end
in view." Other courts have ruled that the militia referred to in the Second
Amendment is today's National Guard. Thus, the Second Amendment only guarantees the
right of states to have an armed National Guard - not private citizens to own guns.
In 1983, Morton Grove, Ill., passed a city ordinance that banned
hand-guns within the city limits. The ordinance was challenged on the basis of the
Second Amendment. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ban, writing,
"We conclude that the right to keep and bear handguns is not protected by the Second
Amendment." The U.S. Supreme Court let the Circuit Court's ruling stand without
comment, indicating its concurrence with the Circuit Court's decision.
The private ownership of guns is a "privilege" granted by
governments - not a constitutionally protected "right." And when that
privilege is abused, or becomes a danger to the public, then governments have a duty to
pass laws to protect the public. The state of Iowa or the federal government could
pass a law that totally banned handguns, and such a law would be constitutional.
-- John Johnson,
state coordinator, Iowans for
the Prevention of Gun Violence,
3575 Rimrock Dr. N.E.,
Cedar Rapids.