Weapons of war should be allowed | Letter – The Courier-Journal

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

The Second Amendment is not about guns, Instead, it is about the inalienable right to self defense.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

CJ Letter 1:56 p.m. ET March 6, 2017

Weapons(Photo: Czanner, Getty Images/iStockphoto)

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently found that the Second Amendment does not apply to weapons of war. I beg to differ. In our founders day, the musket was a weapon of war and a firearm widely used outside of war.Like most people today, our founders knew that technology would advance. Clearly, they believed that one day tyrants could rise again. This was the single most important aspect of why the founders established the Second Amendment. No modern day judge could possibly reach any other conclusion unless influenced by self-ideology. The Second Amendment not only covers AR-15s and AK-47s, but bigger more powerful semi automatics. Killers can always kill when they are facing unarmed victims, but this is not so for the armed citizen facing soldiers with semi-automatic weapons, for revolvers, shotguns and bolt action rifles are limited against such firepower. The Second Amendment is not about guns, Instead, it is about the inalienable right to self defense, a right that should never be defined by any man or woman, but protected by the oaths of statesmen, who have pledged to uphold that right.

Mark Damon Milby

Pekin, Indiana47165

Read or Share this story: http://cjky.it/2mwYPeE

3:46

3:28

4:00

1:53

2:18

6:56

7:28

3:15

3:05

3:51

3:38

3:12

2:41

3:38

2:31

3:22

3:45

1:33

1:56

3:24

3:03

3:39

3:14

3:37

3:56

3:01

2:19

4:36

2:58

1:47

0) { %>

0) { %>

Read more:
Weapons of war should be allowed | Letter - The Courier-Journal