A closer look at the Second Amendment <\/p>\n
In response to William Ivesters letter to the editor on Monday about the Second Amendment, I ask that he look again at the amendment. It is clever to pick phrases out of context, but that is misguided. Amendment 2 in its entirety 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. <\/p>\n
Clearly, the last part of the sentence refers to the first part a well-regulated militia. In todays parlance, I believe that means each states National Guard. Last time I checked, every gun owner in the United States was not a member of the National Guard. <\/p>\n
The judiciary is expressly empowered, by the Constitution, to review, analyze and rule on the meaning of the words of our Constitution. For example, where does the Constitution say guns? It doesnt. It says arms. It is the responsibility of the judiciary to determine what is meant by arms. Bombs? Anti-aircraft missiles? This word, like many others, has to be defined in each generation. <\/p>\n
America of the 21st century is very different from the America of our Founding Fathers. Our ability to interpret the foundational documents of our Republic in light of the realities of the world we live in is crucial to the vitality of our nation. It is time, and it is appropriate and necessary, for our country to enact legislation that seeks to protect its citizens. <\/p>\n
Cathy Swerdlow Longwood <\/p>\n
As a graduate student studying writing at the University of Central Florida, I read Scott Maxwells Sunday column on grammar with great interest. It may surprise him to find out, though, that I am on his side. <\/p>\n
While the self-appointed grammar police patrol public writing, ever vigilant for imagined crimes against the English language, modern linguistics scholars acknowledge that language changes, and the language rules change with it. They know and appreciate that Ernest Hemingway splits infinitives, Jane Austen ends sentences with prepositions, and E.B. White himself uses sentence fragments and comma splices. Great writing comes from brilliant use of words, not blind obedience to dictatorial grammar rules. <\/p>\n
And kudos to Maxwell for defending his writing with a good dictionary. What a great counterattack to grammar police brutality. Hopefully, these militant grammarians will reference their own 21st-century rule book before they literally pounce on Maxwell again. <\/p>\n
Leslie Nixon Ormond Beach <\/p>\n
Normally, I would excoriate the Sentinels editor for printing a letter like Bill Lanes on Sunday with its theme of \"drip drip drip\" as \"evidence of collusion\" between the Trump campaign and the Russians. <\/p>\n
However, since the mainstream news sources coupled with the intelligence community and Democratic politicians offer the same nonproof of such, I'll give the newspaper a pass on publishing \"fake news.\" <\/p>\n
David Holley Orlando <\/p>\n
In response to President Trump's accusation that President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, Sen. Marco Rubio said if we find out it's not true, he'll have to explain what he meant. <\/p>\n
Trump's history is to tell a lie and defend it aggressively, or say the media twisted his meaning, Then tell another bigger lie to divert attention from the first one. His lies are tied up in so many knots 100 sailors in 10 years couldn't untie them. <\/p>\n
How about reversing Rubios plan of action? Demand that Trump prove his claim is true. <\/p>\n
There is a truism that it's much easier to prove a positive than a negative. If hes as smart as we've been told, Trump could clear this up in minutes. His mendacity is mindful of the boy who cried wolf. One day the wolves will devour their creator. <\/p>\n
James Weatherspoon St. Cloud <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Read the original here: A closer look at the Second Amendment In response to William Ivesters letter to the editor on Monday about the Second Amendment, I ask that he look again at the amendment. It is clever to pick phrases out of context, but that is misguided. Amendment 2 in its entirety 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. Continue reading
\nWhat the Second Amendment really says about guns: Letters - Orlando Sentinel<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"