- Home
- Solano News
- US / World
- Opinion
- Living
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Business
- Obituaries
- Comics
- Gallery
- Classifieds
- Advertisers
- Coupons
- Contact Us
3,058
1,520
Jack Batson and alternate history
With increasing frequency, Jack Batson inflicts upon us his bizarre interpretations of facts and events. In his column (Jan. 26, “Long struggle ahead on gun control”), Mr. Batson opines, “If the Second Amendment allowed unrestricted gun ownership, it would have been placed in the First Amendment.” Say what?
That statement is so absurd as to boggle one’s mind. If one follows his logic, then in Batson’s America our protections from unreasonable search and seizure, from double jeopardy, our right to a speedy trial, from self-indictment, and so forth – rights enumerated in amendments other than the First – would take on inferior roles. After all, as he says, if they meant what they said, they “. . . would have been placed in the First Amendment.”
Mr. Batson then thoroughly confuses himself and the reader by trying to link the Second Amendment to Article I, section eight, of the Constitution. He is trying to mix government duties (Constitution) and individual rights (Bill of Rights). Mr. Batson would do well to do research and to read the history of the development of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Founders gave us a framework of both liberty and governance. Their care in drawing up those documents has allowed our great republic to flourish and our citizens to enjoy freedom as no other people in the world enjoy.
The rest of his shallow essay is a recital of straw men, which he knocks down, and of anti-gun sentiment, which does nothing to advance the dialogue about gun rights and duties that needs to take place. Another reminder that he and everyone engaging in this dialogue needs to remember: The Bill of Rights does not grant us rights, it spells out what rights we already have and places restrictions on the government to protect those rights.
Mr. Batson would do well to stop trying to create alternate history. The true history we have stands well on its own and does not need his distortions and falsities.
Franklin Crutchfield
Fairfield
Discussion | 16 comments
The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy
Recent Posts
- Fairfield Motel 6 Fire
- Freeway grass fire spreads to roof of Motel 6 in Fairfield
- Rodriguez High School track standout Bryce Houston
- Surprise Hossa scratch part of NHL injury culture
- Appeals court keeps Solano child rapist locked up
- Jurors begin sanity deliberations in fatal stabbing case
- Juniper Street house fire in Vacaville
- NorthBay Medical Center’s new neurosurgery room
- Weather for June 19, 2013
- US, Taliban will hold talks that hopefully lead to peace
- G-8 summit spurs work on historic trade deal
- NASCAR Express Train sold out for 25th Toyota/Save Mart 350 in Sonoma
- Solano County Fair to team with tribal group
- Slow food festival returns to Rio Vista
Joey PorterFebruary 08, 2013 - 5:17 pm
Here here Huzzah!
Reply |Les DarbisonFebruary 09, 2013 - 12:24 am
On almost all issues facts get in the way of progressive liberals. Thank you Mr. Crutchfield . For your effort at putting this Liberal progressive in his place. But I'am afraid most of the people like him can't hear reason or have an honest dialog on any issue.
Reply |Erik84February 08, 2013 - 5:41 pm
Look at the facts Jack. Only a small percent of murders are committed using assault rifles (3.5 % per FBI website) . Don't forget a gun is just a tool the person is the weapon. Write an article about the fact that every mass killing lately the gun men were on or coming off prescription anti- depressants. They don't post that in the news.
Reply |Shirlee PierceFebruary 08, 2013 - 6:11 pm
I've also heard that in all the mass shooting incidents, the shooters were on anti-depressants. Users of psychotropic drugs also have high incidences of suicide. Also, many of our men are coming home from military duty, and committing suicide. We need to find out if they are also on these anti-depressant drugs, and if so, that is the reason for such high suicide rates. Great letter Mr. Crutchfield!
Reply |The SugarJarFebruary 08, 2013 - 7:05 pm
Users of psycho-tropic drugs are most likely suffering from some mental illness or another. Whether it is the illness or that the med isn't right (or dangerous) is not a black & white issue. Mental illness, including depression, can potentially be stabilized (some more stable than others) with proper treatment--which can include medication--the right combination. Just getting the right combination of medication can be quite challenging. So while it would be interesting to find out if those who go on mass shooting sprees--or those who kill either themselves or others--are on "antidepressants", it might not be enough to come to a useful conclusion.
Reply |CD BrooksFebruary 09, 2013 - 6:52 am
FDC, I don't know Mr. Batson but I believe his intent might have been putting gun rights on the same level as free speech? Free speech is widely written, the most protected, argued and undeniable of all our rights and perhaps Mr. Batson was presuming the framers didn't want to go quite that far? Let us not forget the other rights guaranteed to all Americans but often ignored as this argument moves forward.
Reply |CD BrooksFebruary 09, 2013 - 8:44 am
FDC, please just remember as you argue this case other folks rights that are equally important are being trampled. The hypocrisy has been overwhelming and as I attempt to make those connections, the gun people get all upset. Not sure why one is more a right than another?
Reply |George Guynn, JrFebruary 10, 2013 - 10:08 am
Great letter Mr. Crutchfield. CD Brooks, not sure what rights of others you are talking about. Is there a right for lefties to tax and spent till workers have no money and deadbeats are rich? Is there a right to a chicken in every pot? Should criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens? I sure hope not!
Reply |CD BrooksFebruary 10, 2013 - 10:54 am
GGJ, a typical Conservative Republican response. Your party had the votes and willingness to strip Americans rights had they been elected. Good clear thinking voters recognized the dysfunction and that is why you lost. But hey, don't mess with your guns, right? Thanks for continuously making my case.
Reply |StRFebruary 10, 2013 - 11:27 am
What about equal taxation? A friend of mine said about welfare Moms...Why should I have to pay for her kid, if I didn't have the fun of making it? Everyone needs to take responsiblity for their own actions and not expect everyone else to pay for bad decisions.
Reply |StR BookFebruary 10, 2013 - 12:13 pm
What a Young Woman Ought to Know (Self and Sex Series) (Hardcover) by Mary Wood-Allen (Author) 1898.....Teaches you to check out a potential mate like selecting a good horse. Remember ladies whoever you mate with is potentially the father of your child. Don't "date" anybody unless you think they would make a good parent for your future children.
Reply |Les DarbisonFebruary 10, 2013 - 9:47 pm
Your comment that you won. And we lost because we where dysfunctional Yes we lost and part of that was are fault. So lets take a look at some other facts that effected the out come of this election. A media that was overwhelming in support Of the lefts agenda . The willings of them to not hold this administration accountable for any of there actions or inactions. Fast and furious, Solendria (SP) fiasco, and Bengausi (SP) the Chevy volt ? And what would you have said if there was a 24hr channel talking about Obamas family being Communist and then just beating down communist ideals and show how they failed to bring the down trodden out of poverty. Yet it was ok for there to be a 24hr. channel on the supposed evils of the Mormon Religion, And the standard tactics of the liberal left when they can't debate on the fact's they make it about hate. I guess freedom of speech really means nothing to you when our not speaking. Or you would have spoken up for all those citizens who where slandered by your kind. While the Tea Parties are mostly white people does that mean they don't or didn't have the right to voice their opinions without being labeled racist . And at that same time Obama honored Out right racists ,dope smoking liberal takers in the OWS movement. Just saying their's more to the story. I here lefties always saying the Coke Bro. fund the Tea Party I know for a fact they fund no TP. in Solano Co. or any where i've read about . Can you say that about George Sorroes or the other filthy rich one % lefties that want to take are freedoms from us.
Reply |CD BrooksFebruary 11, 2013 - 6:52 am
Les Darbison: Uh, okay.
Reply |StRFebruary 11, 2013 - 7:02 am
@ CD Chicken...Me thinkest thou are a fowl ill-formed plucketh bald bird with scant feathers and a hairy back. Be thou amuseth byeth this?
Reply |StRFebruary 11, 2013 - 7:31 am
@CD....I was just kidding,,,,Just trying to provoke a response. Bye..
Reply |