Facebook Twitter



It seems to me that when those chosen men assembled more than 200 years ago and wrote the Constitution of these United States they felt it important that laws could be read and understood by all the people.

Those men have long gone to their eternal rewards. The numbers of people who live within the framework of the Constitution who never were involved in the original work, has multiplied. Yet most of us still agree with the original wording.We have a whole "industry" that makes a living today either telling us what those framers of the Constitution had in mind when they wrote or to give interpretation to that which was written. I think the words still are written so that everyone may read and understand, and we need not rely on others to tell us what the Constitution contains.

Gary G. Sackett, a member of "the board of directors of Utahns against gun violence," has written his view (April 27) of what the Second Amendment to the Constitution means.

By the very title of the Sackett organization, one could assume the total elimination of guns from all Utahns would be most desirable.

Should that happen, how then might the state assemble a "well-regulated militia"? How do we as members of a free state ensure the necessary "security" spoken of in the Second Amendment?

We do it as the Second Amendment guarantees us the right as individuals to "keep and bear arms." That shall not be infringed. Yet, 200 years after that guarantee was given in the Constitution, there are those who tell us what we read is not what was meant.

E. Wheeler Oliphant

Salt Lake City