I can’t say I’m too surprised; the Daily has hit a new low. Since 1992 I have seen some pretty idiotic columns in the Daily, but “Muzzling the Beast” was perhaps the most uninformed crap you may have ever printed.

Ms. Kistenmacher, where do you get your “information” about the Second Amendment? Oh, that’s right, Webster’s Dictionary. That is much better than reading the works or speeches of James Madison, Thomas Jefferson or your favorite Founding Father.

They all knew that if the general population was armed, the central government would always have to fear an uprising in the back of their collective minds —much like the Revolutionary War and the Civil War.

You thought wrong when you thought the Founding Fathers wouldn’t think the Second Amendment would be taken so seriously.

Your “facts” from an anti-gun justice department left out the several million private citizens who brandish a firearm to ward off an attacker each year. Australia and Great Britain both outlawed private gun ownership, and crime has skyrocketed.

Criminals will just break in while people are home and either shoot you (the criminals didn’t turn in their guns) or beat you with a bat, piece of wood, pipe or whatever.

The last two things I need to respond to are 1) people can hunt some animals with a bow and arrow, but it’s pretty hard to hit a pheasant on the fly with an arrow; and 2) to respond to your comment about “if something puts other people in harm’s way … whether we have a constitutional right to it or not, we shouldn’t have it.”

I think your right to free speech sends people into harm’s way because it misinforms them.

By your own standards, you don’t have a right to it, so please stop. If you succeed and get rid of ALL guns like you want, do you really expect to have freedom of speech or press?

What will an oppressive government have to worry about? Or, as a good liberal, do you believe we will all be happy and sing songs and hold hands?

Jeff Brinkman

Alumnus

Colo