Letters to the editor

Mar. 06, 2013 @ 09:03 PM

Gun control vs. the Second Amendment

There is much ado about gun control and the Second Amendment these days.  Those who oppose responsible gun control hide behind the Second Amendment and the twist they put on it says they haven’t read the amendment. Opponents of gun control also pick and choose the parts of the amendment that suits them and take them totally out of context.

This is what the Second Amendment says: “A well-regulated Militia, being, necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Opponents of responsible gun control use the last two phrases of the amendment and subvert the meaning of the Amendment to suit their cause. Using it as they do is totally out of context. The right of people to bear arms was necessary in 1791. The colonies were at risk from England, who wanted to keep them subjects of the Crown. There were no American armed forces in that day, which made it necessary to have a well-regulated militia that would respond immediately to hostile parties. Citizens bearing arms were absolutely necessary for the safety of the nation. The amendment starts with a restriction, “a well-regulated militia,” which means the militia was trained to defend the nation.

I totally disagree with the 2008, 2010 Supreme Court interpretation of the Second Amendment. They, too, have taken the last portion of the Second Amendment completely out of context.

E. “Al” Roberts


Questioning the governor’s loyalties

Gov. McCrory has a very important decision to make. Who does he represent?

I call upon the governor to represent me and all the homeowners and small businesses in North Carolina.

Since the governor worked for Duke Power  28 years and owns many shares of stock (he won't disclose the number), this would be an unprecedented conflict of interest if he were to choose members of the Public Utilities Commission.

He must show his integrity by forming an independent blue ribbon panel to appoint commission members. Anything short of this is a slap in the face to all who voted for him, and his action will clearly demonstrate his ethics. Electric power is a vital commodity that could mean life or death to the poor.  

Will his answer be "people over profits" or "profits over people." We will remember at election time.

Ruth Zalph
Chapel Hill