Most Read: Local

Rosenwald, Md.
E-mail E-mail |  On Twitter Follow |  RSS RSS Feed
Posted at 10:21 AM ET, 01/23/2013

Letter writer wonders if local sheriff will protect gun rights vs. Feds

All politics is local, right?

I had that thought (again) coming across a letter-to-the-editor the other day in SoMdNews.com, a group of newspapers in Southern Maryland. (I love that in the age of Facebook and Twitter, letters to the editor are still such great reads.)

The author of the letter that caught my eye is listed as “Mike McGinn, California.” Mr. McGinn wants to make sure the St. Mary’s County sheriff will protect the right to bear arms should the Feds come after them.

He writes:

It is apparent from the strong political winds blowing around us that we shall soon have some form of federal gun control imposed upon us via executive diktat, judicial fiat or legislative sleight of hand. This control will likely infringe upon our right to protect our personal liberty and safety by keeping and bearing arms, a God-given right which the Second Amendment specifically prohibits the federal government from infringing upon.
My question to Sheriff Timothy K. Cameron is: Will you be complicit in a federally imposed executive order, judicial ruling, or law that infringes upon our right to keep and bear arms, or will you uphold the Second Amendment in accordance with your oath of office?

McGinn points out that the sheriff swore to uphold the constitution on Dec. 4 2006.

President Obama, in recently announcing new proposals for gun control, also cited the Constitution. “We have the right to worship freely and safely — that right was denied to Sikhs in Oak Creek, Wisconsin,” Obama said, according to this report by my colleague Scott Wilson. “The right to assemble peacefully — that right was denied shoppers in Clackamas, Oregon, and moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado.”

“It was citizens bearing arms who cast off the oppressive and tyrannical shackles of the British crown,” McGinn wrote. “Will Sheriff Cameron uphold and defend our right to keep and bear arms, the express purpose of which is to protect our personal liberty and safety, or acquiesce to what portends to be an unconstitutional federal gun grab and, ultimately, a loss of the aforementioned principles?”

I will let you know if the sheriff responds.

By  |  10:21 AM ET, 01/23/2013

 
Read what others are saying
     

    © 2011 The Washington Post Company