Kenneth Brandt’s response to Mrs. Hughes did not really tell us what we really needed to know and deserves a response. This aspersion toward one political affiliation may have some merit when you consider that over several years the NRA has contributed over $50 million to the Republican Party while at the same time less than $500 to the Democratic Party. It’s worth mentioning and there are no aspersions cast here just some hard facts.
Then the argument that guns don’t kill people, people do, and relating it to cars. Well, cars are not made to kill things, they are made for transportation, for one thing. Using that analogy, there should be no objection to extrapolating it to guns. Cars must be registered, licensed, and you must get a license to operate a car or any other vehicle. You must have insurance.
His first point, while true, neglects to point out that Congress was, until the recent massacre in Las Vegas, considering legislation to make owning a silencer legal for citizens.
Second point: The majority of the weapons were illegal that were used by the Las Vegas shooter is pure bunk. He legally purchased all of the weapons recently in the state of Nevada and Utah and the bump stocks are currently legal. President Reagan and the then-NRA passed a ban on assault weapons that had a sunset provision and since has expired, yet Republican opposition has prevented its renewal for years.
Third point. There are existing laws preventing mental issues from buying arms. The laws for mental health vary from state to state and an executive order that President Obama put in place regarding mental health was revoked by Trump very early in the year. A national standard regarding mental health issues that prevent people from buying guns is definitely needed.
The issue of the right to bear arms as it appears in the Second Amendment says nothing about individuals. It is fairly specific about states and their right to maintain a “well regulated militia” for defense. It might be an idea to actually read the Second Amendment once in a while. Still, it is controversial, yet it is hard to justify individual persons being able to own weapons that can allow a single individual to kill over fifty people and wound several hundred in a manner on minutes. History is a powerful tool if you happen to know it and understand it.
German citizens being armed was not something that Hitler was concerned about, it wasn’t true. They had lost World War I and were highly restricted by Europe, which led to resentments, which Hitler used to create nationalism, anti-semitism, and called the media fake news. The disarming of the media was Hitler’s first step toward power.
• • •
John Pierce is a resident of Waikoloa.