Reasonable reasons gun control is unreasonable

Editor:



After reading yet another of Denton May’s almost weekly far-left letters to the editor, this one under the subject of “Reasonable gun control is long overdue” in the Cortez Journal Aug. 21, I feel a “reasonable” response (Mr. May calls these “bleatings” in his letter) is warranted.

Mr. May chastises advocates of gun ownership for “presuming to know the intentions of the founders,” then goes on to say, “very likely, they (the founders) would have limited the uses of such weapons to the military.” Sounds to me he, too, presumes to conveniently know the founders’ intentions. Is it a “reasonable” conclusion that advocates of gun ownership (and the U. S. Supreme Court) do not know the founders’ intentions, but Mr. May somehow does?

Here’s my “reasonable” opinion about Mr. May’s “reasonable” gun control laws: Those laws will only be “reasonable” to Mr. May if he is the one that gets to define “reasonable.”

Also, I believe we have “reasonable” laws against murder. Somehow, those “reasonable” laws don’t hinder murderers any more than I suspect Mr. May’s additional “reasonable” gun control laws would. I wonder if Mr. May would also like to add another “reasonable” law making it illegal to illegally kill or harm another person. Yes, I bet that’d help fix the problem.



Rick Corbitt

Dolores

Via email