In last week’s Eagle & Journal, J.F. Kelly points out that Kyle Rittenhouse broke no laws by carrying an assault weapon to the demonstration at Kenosha, Wisconsin (although the 18-year old friend who bought the gun for him apparently did). Vice President Harris reacted to the not-guilty verdict by saying that there is still more work to be done. Mr. Kelly then asks what sort of work that would be, failing to grasp the obvious. What I believe the Vice President had in mind was that the gun laws need to be changed so that a stupid naïve minor could not acquire a military assault weapon and then freely carry it in public – especially under tense circumstances that critically raise the level of danger to everyone in the vicinity. The whole problem lies in the gun laws themselves.

One of the less noticed aspects of the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol was the effectiveness of the Washington D.C. gun laws. Nobody, let alone a minor, can get away with carrying an assault rifle in public in the District. Those laws by and large prevented the assaulting mob from carrying firearms, likely saving many lives in the process.

The simple fact, regardless of Mr. Rittenhouse’s legal defense, is that nobody would have been shot and killed if he was not carrying a gun.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.