‘Much more restrictive’

  • Published in Letters

To The Editor:

In response to Stephanie Barnes’ letter last week, first let me say I have no objection to convicted domestic abusers losing their rights to own firearms, but only after due process has been served. Maxine Grad’s proposed bill circumvents due process and, therefore, is unconstitutional.

I'd also like to point out that your saying that the guns of 1791 were all single-fire muskets is wrong. As early as the 17th century (1680, in Italy), the Cookson repeater system was used and produced in the United States from 1750 until the mid-19th century and valued for its rapid rate of fire. And there were others as well.

Gun control of today is much more restrictive than I believe the Founding Fathers would ever have wanted. During their time most "military" weapons were privately owned and much more powerful than the government’s weapons. Many civilians had more firepower than the government, including cannons. And I believe that is exactly how our Founding Fathers wanted it because that's the only way to protect the people from an oppressive government. I also firmly believe if our Founding Fathers had been "seers," as Stephanie asked, they would have created stricter penalties for elected officials who disregard their oath of office by voting to pass laws which violate the constitution!

Bill Robinson
GoVt Washington County regional coordinator