Letter to the Editor: Federal overreach demands local action

It is the duty and responsibility of every citizen to stand up for our God-given or, if you prefer, natural rights. This includes our elected local officials. Our Marco Island city councilors work for us, not the other way around!

We must demand that they honor their solemn oath of office: “I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and will obey the laws of the United States and of the State of Florida. That I will, in all respects, observe the provisions of the Charter and the Ordinances of the City of Marco Island, and will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of City Council.”

Should any Marco Island councilor be unwilling to uphold this oath, there is only one path: if he is a man of honor and integrity, he will resign. The issue at hand is the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which is very simple and clear. The courts have held that “the well regulated militia” to which it refers is you and I, as individuals, and “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The right to bear arms is a natural inherent right and not granted by the government.

It is time to act before our federal government attempts to limit this crucial right. Sincerely commend and thank the Marco Island City Councilors who have the integrity to honor their oath; and encourage those who cannot to resign!

Keith Flaugh

Marco Island Resident

© 2013 marconews.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 7

Brisla writes:

Nobody's taking away your guns. Limiting the types of weapons allowed to be used by the citizens has already been in effect, in case you didn't realize.

Last I checked, surface-to-air missiles are banned. So are tanks. And hand grenades. Are your panties in a bunch about those, too?

Do you LIKE seeing mass murders and cop-killings? Because, other than making the impotent feel powerful, that's what assault rifles and high-capacity magazines are all about.

As Ronald Reagan said, "I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, or hunting, and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of the home."

Number of murders by firearms in 2011

United States - 9,146
Italy - 417
Canada - 173
Germany - 158
Spain - 90
Netherlands - 55
England - 41
Sweden - 37
Poland - 35
France - 35
Australia - 30
Greece - 29
Ireland - 21
Denmark - 15
Japan - 11
Israel - 6

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/w...

ajm3s writes:

In your haste to create such a nice listing of murders in various countries, your hypothesis is that gun control is the difference?

I will offer my understanding, more in keeping with this:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article...

WizeOlMarco writes:

"...support the Constitution of the United States and will obey the laws of the United States and of the State of Florida..."

'We the people' means all the people, not just the gun toting. The Second Amendment can be repealed by new amendment like any amendment. Your suggestion that a City rep should resign if they don't represent your view of the world is an insult to democracy. Try using a ballot, petition or public demonstration initiative as a means to force your views to be adopted as community standard. One role of the Constitution is to protect the minority from the majority.

Brisla writes:

in response to ajm3s:

In your haste to create such a nice listing of murders in various countries, your hypothesis is that gun control is the difference?

I will offer my understanding, more in keeping with this:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article...

From such an unbiased source like the National Review. Why not Fox News? Or the NRA newsletter?

ajm3s writes:

in response to Brisla:

From such an unbiased source like the National Review. Why not Fox News? Or the NRA newsletter?

I guess the content is irrelevant?

ajm3s writes:

I consider the author of the article to to be of merit based on the argument he presents. His position: simply that gun crime reflects the disposition of the shooter rather than the gun law as evident in high crime areas with strict gun laws!

But let me offer another "biased" view:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98...

Is this biased? Well it is a position!

If it was published in the Wall Street Journal or NYT would it be more or less bias?

Content matters not content publisher.

Augggghhhhhhhhhh?

ajm3s writes:

in response to ajm3s:

I consider the author of the article to to be of merit based on the argument he presents. His position: simply that gun crime reflects the disposition of the shooter rather than the gun law as evident in high crime areas with strict gun laws!

But let me offer another "biased" view:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98...

Is this biased? Well it is a position!

If it was published in the Wall Street Journal or NYT would it be more or less bias?

Content matters not content publisher.

Augggghhhhhhhhhh?

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features