George Rebane
The 26dec13 Union has a piece (here, paywalled?) about our Sheriff Keith Royal being listed among the country’s sheriffs who oppose broad attacks on Second Amendment rights. I recently hosted an hour program on NCTV’s Breaking Bread with Sheriff Royal. What he said on the air is consistent with what he told The Union.
Sheriff Royal’s main concern is that the mentally unstable and criminally disqualified persons should not have access to guns. On the face of it, all reasonable people would agree with that statement per se. The part of the discussion that becomes hard is the degree of risk we are willing to accept in disqualified people getting guns as a tradeoff to what extent should we weaken (legally or constructively) Second Amendment rights for the rest of the population.
If, as is often heard, when some silly says that we should accept no risk from crazies getting guns, then that means we effectively abrogate gun rights for everyone. But no one wants to debate risk levels as a reasonable way to evaluate and guide public policy on the private ownership of firearms. The gun controllers talk only about hunting and the narrow types of guns that this recreational activity entails. Self defense, maintaining civic order, and the ability to oppose tyranny are deemed to be topics dear only to fringe ideologues and not worthy of further consideration.
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment