Second Amendment ensures individual right
In his recent letter, [“Gun control,” NW Voices, Jan. 9] Bob Ackerman is right that the Second Amendment means what it says but he is quite wrong about what it means.
The amendment, as written, is indeed an unfettered right. The fist 13 words of the amendment do not nullify or qualify the second 14 words, rather they provide a reason for it.
It is even more implausible that any government — let alone our visionary Founding Fathers — would write a law guaranteeing itself the right to arms. The operating clause “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” cannot be misinterpreted. If the “people” here does not mean individuals, then what does the “people” refer to in the First, Fourth and Ninth Amendments?
If anyone is still not convinced that the Second Amendment is an individual right, they need to look no further than the Supreme Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller. Additional insight can be gained by reading what some of the Founding Fathers had to say about firearms and why the amendment was written.
— John O’Brien, DuPont