Subscribe for 33¢ / day

Regarding the recent editorial, "Three Steps to Sensible Firearm Laws:" The editor's three steps would certainly help to prevent mass murders with firearms such as the massacre at the Parkland, Florida high school. But would any reasonable regulations on gun ownership be blocked in federal courts by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?

Of course, if there were no Second Amendment, all reasonable gun laws could be enacted, and, without a doubt, gun violence in the USA would gradually become less. So, what is the use of the Second Amendment?

Sane adults wanting self-protection and sane game hunters can all own guns, but not military-style assault rifles, at the same time all Americans are afforded, by reasonable gun laws, a degree of protection not now in place. Then, all these gun-owning adults would have no continuing need for the Second Amendment.

Who is left who does need the Second Amendment to guarantee their ownership of large magazine military-style firearms? First, there are the paranoid self-styled patriots who tell us: "They (the government) are going to try to take my guns away." Second, there are the members of the boys-and-their-toys wing of the National Rifle Association. Third, there are the criminally obsessed mass murderers.

The Second Amendment is an unnecessary anachronism from 1791 which serves today to legalize the guns used in murders and mass murders. It is time to repeal the Second Amendment.

Leo Quirk

Corvallis (Feb. 22)

Subscribe to Breaking News

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.