Las Vegas Sun

August 21, 2014

Currently: 83° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Letter to the editor:

NRA forgets part of amendment

I wonder why the National Rifle Association, the self-proclaimed defender of the Second Amendment, never mentions the complete amendment?

The organization focuses on the right to keep and bear arms, but “a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state ...” is never part of its rhetoric.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 23 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. The real question here is why we can't ignore those who want Americans to have no rights to own a firearm and those who want no restriction on what can be owned and no registration requirements.

    As usual, although there is a sane middle ground, we Americans refuse to find it.

    Michael

  2. SgtRock - "Again this is an attempt by Democrats to take guns away from citizens."

    That's odd. I've had weapons for many years and still do. Are you sure they want to take our guns?

  3. SgtRock,

    I'll point to the people and groups that oppose anything that deals with gun show gun purchases and registration issues. The people and groups that fight any restriction on the types of weapons and ammo that can be purchased or the amounts.

    The zealots on both sides keep us from any useful compromise. You may not be a zealot, but they are out there.

    Michael

  4. Vernos,

    Of course there are people and politicians who want to take all guns away from every American. Yes, there are! And there are Americans and politicians who want zero restrictions on weapon and ammo ownership and possession. Yes, there are!

    These are the people and groups that need to be ignored so we can reach a compromise.

    Michael

  5. Michael,

    Much of the " They will take your guns" rhetoric is nothing more than fear mongering BS that is aligned with Obama being a foreign Muslim alien. The is the way the right attacks. Conjure up some nonexistent demon to have people running around with their hair on fire. That loser Ted Nugent didn't make those comments on his own, like others the far right propanganda is confusing reality with fact.

  6. "The organization focuses on the right to keep and bear arms, but "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state ..." is never part of its rhetoric."

    Peele -- ye gods, here we go again. You are obviously ignorant the U.S. Supremes have taken 300+ pages since 2008 to thoroughly cover this part of the Bill of Rights. Educate yourself @ http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07p... and http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09p...

    You all continue to ignore our state's Declaration of Rights which is far more relevant to us. Dig in @ http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Const/NVConst...

    "...the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table." District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S., at __ (slip op., at 64) (2008)

  7. Sgt Rock.I agree that we have some politicians who do want all guns removed from individual
    ownership. But to say that the Democrats as a whole want to take guns away from all, is simply not true.With 3 0ut of 10 Americans (90 million people) who own guns that would be a task that would be impossible for the government to do. Gun registration now that is something that might be on the minds of all politicians.

  8. A million gunshot victims killed over the last few decades. Glad they put that one in the constitution.
    The Japanese, Germans, Koreans and Vietnamese couldn't slaughter that many Americans.
    NRA...another big money lobbying group run by Americans for Americans.

  9. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...
    The NRA uses the above as an argument FOR gun ownership. He fails to mention that guns will be used in most of the crimes mentioned.

  10. Mr. Peele, please check with the U.S. Supreme Court. We have the right. Period.

  11. We definitely have the right. It's paying for the 140,000 gunshot wounds a year that's causing the problem.
    "Screw the guns, it's the people stupid"

  12. "Books have been written and, historically, the militia issues has been put to rest years ago."

    acejoker -- actually the CITIZEN militia is at the heart of this part of the Second Amendment. The McDonald case covered that. Your new government "disarm the citizens" is an excellent point. Castro did that when he took over Cuba, etc., etc. It's been happening here for quite some time. Seems government is scared of a citizenry with the means in hand to fight back.

    "Because there is no comparison whatsoever between an armed and a disarmed man; it is not reasonable to suppose that one who is armed will obey willingly one who is unarmed; or that any unarmed man will remain safe among armed servants." -- Niccolo Machiavelli 1513 "The Prince" Chapter IV

  13. Antigun nutcases, guns don't kill people let alone load, pick-up, point, aim, and pull the trigger, people do.

    Take your warped logic and use it elsewhere. Americans won't allow our guns to be taken away knowing what liberals are dong to America and one day, though it won't be in my life span, but eventually Americans will rise up against the liberal agenda and use their guns to fend off the degenerate social engineering liberals are creating.

  14. I'm not anti-gun nor am I pro-gun. I don't own a gun, I did enough shooting at people from when I was In the Army, and don't plan to no matter what the situation.
    As far as the 2d Amend. goes I did a term paper on that subject in college. When you get to the crux of the purpose of this amendment you have to know what our founding father's were thinking at the time. Part of that discussion was that this country was just out of the Revolutionary War, We had no police, nor formal Armies. So to protect ouselves from foriegn invaders we were given the right to bear arms. In todays society we shouldn't need to bear arms as we have a professional poloce force and a professional army to keep us safe. I feel that given that set of circumstances the 2d Amend needs to be updated to recognize todays needs.

  15. Tim....the anti-gun nutcases aren't the ones shooting 140,000 people a year at a cost of billions.
    I have been involved in several shootings. It is not as much fun as you fools think is is.
    Injuries, lawsuits, stress like you can't believe. The gift that keeps on giving.

  16. Ernie...absolutely correct. The founding fathers could never have anticipated that Americans would use the second amendment to slaughter each other by the millions.
    The country was weak and the concern was foreign invasion. Not allowing some crackhead to get high and murder his entire family.

  17. Abortion isn't a crime and has nothing to do with gun violence. Soon some fool will bring up car crashes. Happens every time.

  18. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connie_Culp...
    Connie Culp....the face of guns in America.

  19. If one thinks about how Jefferson felt about revolutions and the need thereof one can easily see that he didn't intend to have any limits on the Second Amendment.

  20. "So to protect ouselves from foriegn invaders we were given the right to bear arms. In todays society we shouldn't need to bear arms as we have a professional poloce force and a professional army to keep us safe."

    ernieb1202 -- no, the Second Amendment like the entire Bill of Rights didn't give any of us anything new. It protects our liberties and freedoms already in place for centuries before that. Heller clarified that individual self-defense is "the central component" of the Second Amendment right, and that right is "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and traditions." All explained in those Heller and McDonald links posted above.

    And having "a professional poloce [sic] force and a professional army to keep us safe" are even more reasons for respecting those liberties, particularly when they come under the control of tyrants.

    "The only thing new in the world is the history you don't know." -- President Harry Truman

  21. Why do people who apparently love the Bill of Rights always shun or give lip service to the 2nd Amendment?

    It's 2nd for a reason. The reasons our founding fathers had then still apply now. Are the police able to respond instantly to a call if you have home invaders? It takes mere minutes for something bad to happen before the police show up.

    Also, what is the plan to get all the guns out there in America? Does someone have a magic wand that can magically make them go away? Because that's what it would take. Who are you going to send to take the guns away too? The police? What cop wants to sign up for that duty? Not one I know.

    Educating the public on guns and their safe handling would help but we can't do that because exposing kids to guns is taboo.

  22. When I read the comments posted about the Democrats trying to take guns away from America's population, I think we're taking about an alternate reality. I've spent the day canvasing homes and registering voters in the north east and getting ready for the George Lopez event at Rancho HS Sunday,3:30 pm, very much Democratic party activities, and did plan to go shooting tomorrow morning. That was until I couldn't find my favorite ammo in stock, a pity. I've found many of my fellow volunteers enjoy a trip out in our beautiful state and enjoy responsible shooting, one notable shooter being Senator Reid.

    Of course some are dead set against guns, and make valid points on how dangerous guns can be. And almost everyone of them aren't from Nevada. I think anyone well versed in the western culture understands the role gun ownership plays, in our family gun safety and shooting skills were taught at an early age. But the correct moral course in using them was well covered too. All skills that served to benefit our country when I was in the military.

    The point here is this: if your try to lump everyone together who may disagree with you as a liberal, communist, socialist or whatever into a cohesive monolithic group your wrong! If you are as Gov. Rommny calls himself severely conservative you are not the numerical majority of the nation. Most disagree with your positions, yet most, even Democrats, support and enjoy gun ownership, especially in Nevada. Maybe this is why the Democrats are the big tent, the Republicans now are the small tent.

  23. Carmine - If you're going to nitpick, then go all the way. Zimmerman IS a killer. The trial will determine if he's a criminal or not. But, since there is no dispute of fact as to whether he killed Trayvon Martin, he is, in fact, a killer.

    You say he "provided a service ... for the common good of their community." You'll need to explain how shooting and killing Trayvon Martin was a service to the community.