Military-style weapons are for military

In answer to Mr. Gideon’s rebuttal of Sept 4. After extolling the virtues of everyone carrying around assault rifles, his initial letter very clearly said, “...... An armed citizenry would be able to protect themselves and more importantly they would be able to protect themselves from their elected officials. The founders did not trust elected officials to always work in the public’s best interest and as we can see they were quite correct in that belief.”

The Jefferson quotes in his rebuttal say nothing about possessing and/or using arms against our elected officials (a case where facts are changed to agree with one’s opinion). However, it does say, “ ... against tyranny in government.”

The definition of “tyranny” is the cruel use of power, a country or state under the power of an oppressive ruler — like George III, the tyrant most on their minds. It’s not a country led by Barack Obama as Mr. Gideon alluded to in his first letter. We have a country, by the way, that has three very effective branches of government, none of which has absolute power.

My opinion on the right to bear arms is simply that nobody needs military-type assault weapons except our military and police forces. Apparently, I’m one of those simple-minded folks he described, who believes government protects us from harm. I believed it when, if ordered, my unit’s mission was to clear the skies of Soviet and East German aircraft in 1950s Germany. I also believe he has offended just about every man and woman who has ever put themselves in harm’s way, serving and protecting our country as members of the military or police forces.

Lastly, at my age (79), if I were going to take a little blue pill, it wouldn’t be to achieve blissful ignorance.

Len Brauer

Palatine