Share “Current debate an effort to deny weapons...”

Current debate an effort to deny weapons to civilians

Published: January 5, 2013

Aaron Johnson (Your Views, Dec. 28) misses the sobering, yet salient point of the Second Amendment; it's precisely because we have a “well regulated militia” that our individual rights to own weapons are necessary. It's not in spite of that need for a standing army, as he suggests, but because of it. I don't want to ponder the possibility that our government would ever try to subjugate its people by force, or that the people might have to resist such an event with force. However, that's exactly the reason the Founders saw fit to include that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

For Johnson to suggest we shouldn't all have nuclear arms is hyperbole. I support efforts to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but that's not the aim of the current debate. It's more likely an effort to deny weapons to all civilians. Ultimately, all of our rights are anchored by the Second Amendment.

Brad Watson, Oklahoma City

Trending Now


  1. 1
    Grove woman who lied about burying fetus in yard is recharged with child neglect
  2. 2
    Tulsa man jailed, accused of raping 13-year-old girl he met on Facebook
  3. 3
    VIDEO: Tony Romo, Rex Ryan star in Pizza Hut commercial
  4. 4
    Why your boss should care about how much sleep you get
  5. 5
    Close encounter with distant Pluto getting under way
+ show more