Second Amendment rights shouldn’t include assault weapons | TheUnion.com
YOUR AD HERE »

Second Amendment rights shouldn’t include assault weapons

In the late 1780s, the Second Amendment was written, giving citizens the right to bear arms. These arms were single-shot rifles, pistols, bows, swords, etc.

Some people 200 years later have interpreted this to mean the right to bear 50-round-plus automatic assault weapons. I think these kinds of weapons should only be in the hands of our military or police, not the private citizen who is a gun enthusiast/worshiper. Anyone who needs more than one shot to kill a deer (or a person invading his house) is a bad shot and should not own a gun without demonstratively improving his skills.

A license to own a gun should be as important as a license to drive a car.



Dolores “DD” Johnson

Nevada City


Support Local Journalism


Support Local Journalism

Readers around Grass Valley and Nevada County make The Union’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.

 

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User


Letters

Graham Knaus: Closing the digital divide

|

The California State Association of Counties, the voice of California’s 58 counties, would like to thank Nevada County Supervisor Heidi Hall for her strong leadership in supporting broadband for all in the state budget.



See more