Letters to the Editor: Michigan’s 2nd Amendment thugs aren’t what the framers had in mind

To the editor: The 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution has been in effect since Dec. 15, 1791. It states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” (“Trump’s latest ‘very good people’ are 2nd Amendment thugs,” Opinion, May 7)

Bring back the one-shot muzzle loaders.

As a retired English, history and government teacher, I try to remember some old basic rules of English grammar. To complete a sentence, we need a subject and a predicate. However, either one can be implied though not stated. A simple example might be the sentence, “You go,” whose meaning can simply be stated with the sentence, “Go.”

A few simple words at the beginning would remove the confusion in the 2nd Amendment: “As a member of a well regulated militia ...”

We remember that in the Revolutionary War, state militias were the major component of the armed forces.

Now, 229 years later, a genuine confrontational scenario emerges as we see a renegade group armed with multi-shot assault weapons protest in Michigan’s state Capitol. It’s scary out there.

John McGrew, Riverside

..

To the editor: Can anybody articulate any legitimate reason why guns should be permitted in any state Capitol?

As an attorney, I have had to go through a metal detector before entering any courthouse in the last 20-25 years. Pocket knives are not even permitted.

Would Donald Trump or any president be comfortable allowing people to bring weapons into the White House? What about Congress? Would they allow guns in the Capitol building?

I don’t believe that this is a 2nd Amendment issue, but would like to hear from others why they believe they should be entitled to bring guns in any state or federal building.

Gary Yates, Los Angeles