Letter to the Editor: 2nd Amendment
BY A.M. Schnitzer, Bartlesville
Monday, December 31, 2012
12/31/12 at 3:08 AM
The poorly worded, contentious Second Amendment is cited by gun manufacturers, lobbyists and owners as permitting, even advocating, the proliferation and use of multiple-shot hand guns and assault weapons in our society. Let's consider the congressional intent of the Second Amendment, which was proposed in the first Congress in July 1786 and adopted in December 1791 as a part of the Bill of Rights.
The guns of that period were single-shot, muzzle-loading flintlock rifles, such as the Kentucky long-rifle and single- or double-shot, muzzle-loading, flintlock pistols. It is reported that an experienced rifle gunner could get off about two shots a minute. Neither Congress nor the public had ever seen multiple-shot, rapid-firing revolvers, automatic hand guns or assault rifles, all of which came along later.
In consideration of the foregoing, should not present gun ownership by the public be limited to muzzle-loading, single-shot flintlock rifles or two-shot handguns of the same style? Or, alternatively, should the Second Amendment be rewritten to cope with these modern weapons and the hazards and tragedies attributable thereto?
Letters to the editor are encouraged. Send letters to firstname.lastname@example.org.