Dear Editor,

Congress passed bi-partisan legislation in 2021 aimed at reducing gun violence… one baby step and good for what it is. It includes money for school safety, mental health, state crisis intervention programs, and incentives for states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which may provide a more comprehensive background check for those between the ages of 18 and 21 who want to buy guns.

But when the issue of a national ban on anyone under 21 purchasing an assault style rifle was proposed, Republicans recited their usual pablum about “we can’t restrict an individual’s right to own a firearm, it’s in the Second Amendment.” Everyone just nods their head in agreement.

Tell that to the parents and students of Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High when Nicholas Cruz opened up with an assault style rifle… age 18. Mentally another lost soul whom the jury just remanded to life in prison rather than the death penalty because of his troubled upbringing. But where in the Second Amendment does it say that an 18-year-old, any 18-year-old, has the right to buy a weapon designed for warfare? I don’t buy it.

The text of the Second Amendment reads in full: “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.”

A recent survey stated that a quarter of the US population feels threatened by where they live or work. They would logically want a firearm to protect themselves. We have about five now, including a pump action shotgun for coyotes.

Arming oneself for self-protection is much different than the presumed use of an assault style weapon. These are powerful weapons that shred human tissue and demolish whatever they hit. Seal Teams use these.

Rights are balanced by responsibility. Where does the right to a safe environment for high school students, mall shoppers, people at a concert, grocery shoppers, balance out against the right of a still young person to own a weapon made for war?

The Supreme Court has made it clear that self-defense, “the right to keep and bear arms,” is constitutional. But that still doesn’t justify these weapons of war in young hands. The next time someone says that 18-year-olds should have such rights… push back. It’s not dogma. OK… they can serve in the military. Refer again to the “well regulated” part.

Bill Thibedeau

Gilpin County