As I watch yearly events unfold, it repeatedly occurs to me that much of what polarizes us is an inability or unwillingness to connect the dots between seemingly dissimilar issues.
A most recent reminder is the disparity of thinking regarding the First and Second Amendments.
Many citizens were chastised when they practiced their First Amendment freedom of speech by simply kneeling in protest or supporting those who did. Then someone allegedly went into multiple gun shops, gun shows or websites to collect an arsenal of military grade armament and was apparently unchallenged. Defense of the Second Amendment is predicated on being ready to use force to protect us against an oppressive government. Conversely, isn’t that the same goal sought by those who protest our government in hopes of improving it?
I see no harm done by First Amendment peaceful protest. What harm would occur to our Second Amendment rights by having a nationwide database, background checks and waiting periods to flag anyone buying quantities of munitions or whose history suggests they be vetted before owning a weapon? We restrict medications that can be misused to make illicit drugs, are considering limits on opioids and require medical monitoring on drivers with health restrictions. The perpetuation of loopholes leaves a gaping hole in existing gun laws as if no laws applied at all. If dots are connected between seemingly different issues, the result might be mutual rights for all. Who said, “It’s nice to be nice to the nice”?
Paul Zuckerman, Taylorsville