Gun-rights arguments are an insult to those who live under real tyranny

Donald Baker is correct when he reminds us that the Second Amendment is intended to give citizens a means to protect against the rise of a tyrannical government (“Don’t forget one key protection we need: against tyranny of government,” Letters, Jan. 20). Indeed, the First Amendment is intended to do the same.

Yet even though we have many restrictions on the First Amendment, opponents of gun control measures are allowed to openly preach insurrection against our government without ending up in jail, or worse. Meanwhile, as words like fascist, dictator, and tyranny are glibly thrown around, Egyptian citizens deposed a real dictator, without the protection of a First Amendment, and largely without guns.

Our Constitution is strong and has withstood many tests; to suggest that we must choose between the lives of innocents and tyrannical government is insulting — to our government and to us. We do a disservice to our democracy and to the people who truly live under tyranny when we suggest that it is so fragile.

Ann Davis