Rights worth preserving
In response to Craig Smith’s editorial re gun rights, my letter is titled “Free speech rights must acknowledge free speech wrongs.” It doesn’t take much listening to the news to know that free speech is abused with hate, lies, spin and deception constantly uttered. Yet that is the price we are willing to pay to protect our First Amendment rights.
I wonder if Mr. Smith is willing to accept the same diminished right of free speech that he is willing to accept for the right to bear arms? If he believes the Second Amendment can be “periodically revisited and often amended,” does he believe the First Amendment can and should be also? Should free speech be limited to just certain ideas in the same way that certain types of guns are limited? Should the number of words be limited to certain prescribed ones just as gun magazines are limited in the number of bullets? Should a person be subject to a background check before he can utter an opinion? If a person says something that appears “crazy” should we have a “red flag” law that allows the government to take away those words by force and without due process?
Mr. Smith is right when he says “There’s no humor in the Second Amendment.” Neither is there any humor in Venezuela, where there is apparently no right to bear arms and thereby rid themselves of a totalitarian regime.
Other items that may interest you
We have noticed you are using an ad blocking plugin in your browser.
The revenue we receive from our advertisers helps make this site possible. We request you whitelist our site.