Shel Thompson: The Founders did not guarantee weapons for madmen
Is the Second Amendment a license for unrestrained ownership of automatic weapons?
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
The Constitution is purposely vague, crafted by statesmen who understood compromise and civilization’s constant evolution. The deranged killer in Las Vegas was not a candidate for membership in a well-regulated militia, firing a single-shot flintlock.
Incongruously, the loudest unlimited gun advocates cite theoretical takeover by government while supporting unchecked defense budgets churning massive weaponry for a standing professional military. The Founders, highly suspicious of armies, created First Amendment rights guaranteeing speech and assembly and a Second Amendment citizen militia to counter tyrants who might lead them.
Memo: The military and police you cheerlead for, but apparently fear, have more arms than you. Confiscation of rifles and shotguns, curtailment of hunting and home protection, and sinister allegiance to one-world bureaucracies is not the issue. If you can properly explain why or how the Second Amendment is grounds for anyone to own or obtain single-purpose murderous weapons of insanity, please advise.
Shel Thompson, Modesto
This story was originally published October 3, 2017 at 12:00 PM with the headline "Shel Thompson: The Founders did not guarantee weapons for madmen."