PA Bill Number: HB829
Title: In preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Description: An Act amending the act of April 12, 1951 (P.L.90, No.21), known as the Liquor Code, in preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Last Action: Signed in House
Last Action Date: Jul 3, 2024
Pennsylvania: Second Amendment divides readers: Is it 'like a civilian nuclear deterrent' or is it antiquated? :: 06/13/2019
Three days after it was published, an op-ed piece challenging the relevancy of the Second Amendment in today’s America continues to be one of the most-popular reads on The Morning Call’s website. And it’s driving quite a discussion on Facebook.
Many readers disagree with him. Some concur. Here are examples of what people are saying on Facebook, in response to Reinhart’s “Your View” and to my column this morning commenting on Reinhart’s thoughts and asking for others to weigh in on the topic.
Malcolm F Smith II: “The 2nd isn’t an antique. It has been interpreted to mean that any regulation is an infringement; it isn’t. Background checks and red flag laws are designed to protect society from those that shouldn’t own guns. I disagree with bans of weapons but I find regulating them to be perfectly acceptable.”
JoAnn Kennedy: “No. You start chipping away at one and all will be done away with. There are plenty of good laws on the books, just like there are plenty of good journalists who will suffer under freedom of speech and freedom of press.”
Mike Vielhauer: “The fact that the government forces us to pay more taxes, forces more orders restricting our lives and rights, and enters us in idiotic global political disasters and wars is the exact reason we have the 2nd amendment. It gives us the tools (as citizens) to keep the government in check. Almost like a civilian nuclear deterrent. First thing Hitler’s government did was disarm the public. Look what that did for them.”
Richard L. Lindberg: “It is anachronistic since we no longer depend on the militia. We have a standing Army and a well trained and equipped national guard.”
Tim Ryan Zimmerman: “The real question is, how much do you trust your government? Do you trust them enough to hand your firearms over to them?”
Inna Zalutsky: “... 2nd amendment was created with completely different intention which its worshipers (great definition, by the way) completely ignore. Or, if they talk about militias, they don’t assess the reality of today’s military forces. So yes, 2nd amendment is antiquated.”
Richard Harpel: “The second amendment always serves a national purpose.”
Liz Thoma: “There are many epidemics: drug/prescription drug use, alcoholism, DUI, etc. Why are firearms such a hot button to control? Because it leaves the American people defenseless and easy to manipulate. Take a look at every country that has gun control and you will see most of them have severe problems with the government, and their people are left with no recourse. From every standpoint, the 2nd amendment needs to be upheld and not infringed.”
Nicholas Vasseghy: “So you — whoever you are — can guarantee and you are confident that no government at any shape or form at any period in future, will ever try to usurp or at least limit the freedoms and liberties of the American people? Can you guarantee that to your children? Many nations throughout recent history made that mistake, and their children paid a hefty bloody price for the naive actions of their fathers.”
Frank Wilson: “The purpose of the 2nd Amendment, the Constitution for that matter, is not to give rights to citizens, but to limit the rights of the national government.”
Dan Moreland: “Not only is it anachronistic, but if the Founding Fathers could travel in time to see what type of weapons we have in 2019 and how they were being used to shoot up our children, they’d have second thoughts. This is the same Constitution that at one point or another counted blacks as 3/5 a human being and outlawed alcohol.”
John Borelli: “It is absolutely more vital today than ever. If you do your research, you find that the vast and overwhelming majority of shootings are not done by the legal owner of the firearm. In a time when our police departments are constantly demonized and the press champions the perpetrator, who else can we depend on to protect us? I would much rather go down fighting to protect my family and yes, yours also, than be a mindless sheep led to the slaughter. One only has to look at news films of 1930s Germany to see what happens when a nation is disarmed and unable to stand up for itself.”
Morning Call columnist Paul Muschick can be reached at 610-820-6582 or paul.muschick@mcall.com
