Home » News
Home » News

Armed insurrections?

Published January 5, 2013 1:01 am
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2013, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Allan Hales' "Newtown fearmongers" (Forum, Dec. 30) contains numerous logical errors and inconsistencies. In his final point, Hales contends that we need the gun rights afforded us by the Second Amendment in order to resist the potential for government tyranny.

But in order to effectively resist the most powerful regular army in the world (ours), the citizenry needs a lot more than AK-47s and Glocks with 30-round clips. Real resistance would require surface-to-air missiles, anti-tank weapons, heavy artillery and F-16s.

So we are left with a choice: Either the Second Amendment is there to help the citizenry resist a tyrannical government and we need military heavy weapons stored in our basements or the Second Amendment does not apply to armed insurrections, and all military and assault-type weapons are unnecessary.

Charles Brainerd





Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
comments powered by Disqus