The NRA’s revisionistic view of Amendment No. 2
The recent editorial, “Ignoring the obvious” (June 7), uses a phrase that distracts from the apparent position on the Second Amendment by the NRA specifically, and generally the Republican Party. These organizations are not “Second Amendment absolutists.” Nor do they fit the commonly-used phrase, defenders of the Second Amendment. At best, they are Second Amendment revisionists.
I recall that around the 1980s, Republicans openly started to acclimate the public in accepting the phrase “well regulated” as meaning not well regulated. Over the years, this insinuation of revised terminology has made it nearly universal that the opening phrases to the Second Amendment do not exist. Republicans, with the help of the NRA, have effectively muzzled awareness of past and present knowledge through their failure to lead discussions on the extensive history of personal ownership and arms regulations. In the effort to twist up the Second Amendment, Republicans have used a bizarre reasoning to preclude funding of studies aimed at understanding the effects of weapon use in society.
The long-term campaign to spread ignorance results in a public that has little historical and current information to make informed decisions (Mel and Norma Gabler, the late textbook censors, should be proud). This thwarts reaching agreement on any acceptable threshold to personal arms restrictions. The NRA and Republicans are much closer to Second Amendment anarchists.