Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
It appears that Mr. Burkhardt, author of 'Arm those who need to be armed' (Advocate 'Your Letters' 2 Jan 2008), would raise another Solomon-like tyrant to decide who needs and deserves to be armed, splitting the baby-like second class citizens from the armed First Class Citizens. Either we are equal or we are not.
This in the face of the Second Amendment, that "shall not be infringed," and of Article I, Section 25, "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose." Neither documents admits a needs based test for arming a citizen. Good people ought to be armed where they will.
I missed the 'accuracy' in Mr. Burkhardt's Letter but caught the hierarchy implicit in his claim of more knowledge and of the "rabid Larry Pratt." How shall we establish the rankings in this hierarchy of opinion and where does rank argumentum ad hominem rank?
The vast majority of States allowing armed citizens have passed 'shall issue' laws mandating permitting good citizens unless cause can be shown that the citizen should not be armed. Thus good citizens are armed against tyrants Solomon-like and neighborhood.
Wisconsin and Illinois are quite the exceptions since they only do not allow armed citizens under any practical circumstances, even to employing extra-legal harassment through charges of Disorderly Conduct of any temerarious armed second-class citizen.
Yes, let's discuss arming good citizens in this newspaper and recognize that gun control from the Right is as evil as Sarah Brady's gun control from the left. Gun control from the Right is even less honest than Sarah Brady's ignorance.
Doug Huffman
1463 Mountain Road
Washington Island
Wisconsin 54246
It appears that Mr. Burkhardt, author of 'Arm those who need to be armed' (Advocate 'Your Letters' 2 Jan 2008), would raise another Solomon-like tyrant to decide who needs and deserves to be armed, splitting the baby-like second class citizens from the armed First Class Citizens. Either we are equal or we are not.
This in the face of the Second Amendment, that "shall not be infringed," and of Article I, Section 25, "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose." Neither documents admits a needs based test for arming a citizen. Good people ought to be armed where they will.
I missed the 'accuracy' in Mr. Burkhardt's Letter but caught the hierarchy implicit in his claim of more knowledge and of the "rabid Larry Pratt." How shall we establish the rankings in this hierarchy of opinion and where does rank argumentum ad hominem rank?
The vast majority of States allowing armed citizens have passed 'shall issue' laws mandating permitting good citizens unless cause can be shown that the citizen should not be armed. Thus good citizens are armed against tyrants Solomon-like and neighborhood.
Wisconsin and Illinois are quite the exceptions since they only do not allow armed citizens under any practical circumstances, even to employing extra-legal harassment through charges of Disorderly Conduct of any temerarious armed second-class citizen.
Yes, let's discuss arming good citizens in this newspaper and recognize that gun control from the Right is as evil as Sarah Brady's gun control from the left. Gun control from the Right is even less honest than Sarah Brady's ignorance.
Doug Huffman
1463 Mountain Road
Washington Island
Wisconsin 54246