Taking aim at the Second Amendment

Our hearty congratulations to the U.S. Senate, which recently reaffirmed the nation's inane gun policy: Disarm the law-abiding citizens.


Congratulations, senators. You have ensured that only those who wish others harm will be allowed to carry concealed weapons across state lines.

A proposal to allow registered gun owners to carry their concealed weapons when they travel across state lines failed in the Senate this past week when it fell two votes short of the 60-vote supermajority necessary to end debate.

Tellingly, Senate Democrats facing tough opposition in their home states in next year's elections -- such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada -- voted for the proposal. Hmm. They must think a majority of the voters in their states like the idea.

It's interesting that such a law isn't necessary to establish the portability of your other constitutional rights. Your First Amendment rights go with you in all 50 states. So do your Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and so on. (We skipped over your Third Amendment rights, because they involve prohibiting the government from forcing you to quarter soldiers in your home, and you don't need to take that with you on the road!)

So, whither your Second Amendment rights? Where in the Constitution does it say you have to leave them at home? And do lawmakers think there's less risk on the road? Or just that you don't have a right to self-defense in another state?

This is a particular aggravation for those who travel for a living, especially truck drivers, who often sleep in their trucks.

Moreover, who are lawmakers fooling, other than some of their constituents? They know darn good and well that criminals, by definition, don't follow the law. That's what makes them criminals.

So, in preventing law-abiding, registered and trained citizens from taking their firearms with them across state lines, Congress is ensuring that the only ones who are armed will be the criminals.

Other than that, it makes a lot of sense.



Tue, 11/21/2017 - 23:53

Editorial: Bottom Line

Tue, 11/21/2017 - 23:53

Editorial: ‘Fair-weather feminists’