Gun rights

After reading Brian O’Neill’s Jan. 10 column, “Let’s Have the Difficult Conversations About Guns,” I believe that he is having difficulty understanding the Second Amendment; I thought that I’d try to help him out.

First, it’s part of a group of amendments to the Constitution called the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is meant to limit the power of government and guarantee the people certain rights.

Now, let’s look at the Second Amendment. The first part refers to “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.” What is a militia? It’s a group of armed citizens. It’s not a trained military.

The second part says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” What’s not to understand? If “the people” are not the citizens of our country then who are they? The right of the people to keep and bear arms is so that they can form a militia if need be. It is as simple as that. Our Founding Fathers could not have written it any more simply or clearly.

Lastly, Mr. O’Neill made mention that a lot of the gunrights advocates were from outside the city. That’s true. That’s because we travel to, or through, the city quite often. If I travel from my home in Baden, through Pittsburgh, to say, Monroeville, how many municipalities will I travel through? Now if each one of those has its own ordinances for firearms, how would anyone be able to keep up with them? Read Pittsburgh’s proposal: Just having rifle ammunition in your vehicle while passing through the city could get you into trouble. JOHN BALL

Baden