John Odenkirk’s letter last week is a pretty good example of how not to engage in a discussion. “Whining drivel” is not a phrase that elicits rational thinking from either side. Mr. Odenkirk apparently takes the too-well-worn path of insult, belittle and if possible smear those holding different views. Hardly rational discourse. I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that Mr. Odenkirk is interested in saving innocent lives; realizes that we have a mortality problem in the United States of death from guns to the tune of approximately 30,000 a year. Liberal or conservative, that is a serious number of lives. If that were an outbreak of some virus, the CDC would be all over it and Congress would be holding hearing after hearing trying to find out why and who was at fault.
I take the Constitution seriously and especially the Bill of Rights, which leads to the Second Amendment. Alas, many gun enthusiasts fail to read or understand the rather straightforward words used. To wit: “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.” Please read slowly and out loud the first four words, “A well regulated militia . . .”
I cannot think of anything less safe, less protective of oneself or one’s friends than having everyone packing and firing guns at whatever in a darkened hall. Hardly the “well regulated militia” that the writers of the Constitution envisioned.
John Odenkirk’s words are unrealistic, and wildly off the mark if we are talking about public safety.