All News & Blogs
I wonder if William Dowling is a surrogate for The Free Lance-Star view on gun control, since his ill-researched rants get posted at the top of the page of the Sunday editorial section, when the responses to his vitriol on gun owners hit the pages midweek ["Flawed logic is used in gun-regulation debate," Feb. 3].
My "flawed logic" in owning weapons comes from my God-given right guaranteed under the Constitution. As a recognized right under that document, there is no requirement to articulate why I choose to exercise it. Get it?
That's not Bill Hanrahan's opinion, that's the opinion of the Supreme Court. The last time Dowling wrote, he ranted about all kind of issues to compare and contrast his arguments, and he's done it again!
Cleaning rivers is important, but not a constitutional requirement; states control the licensing of motor vehicles and speed limits under the 10th Amendment. His flawed argument is that speed reduction saves lives. According to Dr. Charles Lave's recognized study on speed, increases in speed from 55 to 65 mph had a 3.4 to 5.1 percent reduction in highway deaths. The maximum speed limit in Virginia is 70 mph.
Before sending another letter insulting the wisdom of citizens who understand their constitutional rights, I suggest Dowling read the first 10 amendments known as the "Bill of Rights"--the foundation that layered and protected each original amendment. Would you allow your home to be quartered by troops, or limit the content or days the FLS could publish?
As a father of three, I reserve the right to use all legal and lethal means to protect them, and I will as necessary. I will not join the flock of sheep thinking that it's cool to be an appetizer on a wolf's menu.
William J. Hanrahan