Skip to footer

Readers write: Reactions to 'Armed in America' book review

Letters to the editor for the March 12, 2018 weekly magazine. 

|
George Frey/Reuters
Salesman Ryan Martinez clears the chamber of an AR-15 at the "Ready Gunner" gun store In Provo, Utah, U.S. on June 21, 2016.
  • By Edna Steele Monitor reader
  • Frank Godard Monitor reader
  • Arthur Naebig Monitor reader
  • Jim Hovater Monitor reader
  • Virginia McCullough Monitor reader
  • Bill H. De Bruin Monitor reader

We received a very robust response to our Jan. 26 review of “Armed in America,” by Patrick J. Charles, that appeared in the Books section of CSMonitor.com. From the more than 100 reader responses that arrived within a few days of publishing it, we have chosen a few that give some idea of the range of opinion represented. 

– Marjorie Kehe, Books editor

Second Amendment debate

Thank you, thank you, for the final sentence of the review, which reads, “Elected leaders, guided by citizens and not by powerful interest groups, should feel free to decide for themselves, without intrusion from conflicting interpretations of the Second Amendment, what is best for society and for protecting our families.” 

Of course it should be about protecting our families.

Edna Steele

Burlingame, Calif.

I am always interested in the gun laws of the United States and in particular the current debate surrounding gun laws. 

Articles such as this book review are timely. America needs considered debate on this issue. I am a regular visitor to the US and the concealed-carry factor is a worry for me and my family.

Frank Godard

Doncaster, England

I am an “originalist,” so I think that the Second Amendment should be taken at face value. But I also recognize that at the time of its writing, there were only single-shot, muzzle-loading, flintlock firearms. 

Therefore, everybody should be allowed to own and carry such firearms without any regulation on them. Ownership of any other sort of firearm should be regulated.

Arthur Naebig

La Valle, Wis.

What if my elected official doesn’t share the same beliefs regarding my rights? How is that official representing me?

Jim Hovater

Sheffield, Ala.

Thank you so much for this article and for bringing out its important conclusion and history.

Virginia McCullough

Newburyport, Mass.

At the time of the writing of the Second Amendment, gun ownership was a given, considering the need for hunting for food as well as defense on an isolated farmstead far away from everyone. 

If anything, the Bill of Rights supports the private ownership of guns. To be proficient with a gun requires frequent practice, further reinforcing the right to private ownership. For frequent practice, the gun needs to be readily available, not stored in an armory. 

To be able to handle a gun safely, you need to be familiar with it, so it needs to be your own gun that you are using.

Bill H. De Bruin

Wautoma, Wis

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Readers write: Reactions to 'Armed in America' book review
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Readers-Respond/2018/0310/Readers-write-Reactions-to-Armed-in-America-book-review
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe