As downstate insensibilities begin to influence upstate politics, we notice ardent supporters of gun control frequently questioning the "need" for certain types of firearms deemed unnecessary. It is a peculiar phenomenon to now have law-abiding citizens justify how they decide to exercise their constitutional rights.
To be fair, we should apply the same logic to other choices in life and determine whether they should be negotiated away. Why does one need to have more than one abortion? Why would one need to have more than one sexual partner? Why would one need to possess a car that can go faster than the posted speed limit?
To grant presidents, governors or government purview over our Bill or Rights without opposition is emotional, negligent and unforgivable. The paranoid and dystopian call for federal solutions in every aspect of society is often reckless and over-reaching. Regardless of horrific societal tragedy, war, an economic or natural disaster, there are inalienable rights independent of government and they are not to be sacrificed for the ambiguous desire to achieve the greater good.
History shows it is the customs, traditions and morals that shape society, not politicians legislating to perfect the human condition. The quintessence of a free people is that we do not institute a society where government protects us from ourselves.
John Sokolewicz
Malta