- Man shot by police ID'd; witness shares his side of story (2/17/17)31
- Settlement reached in accidental shooting case at Kelly High (2/15/17)10
- MSHP: McLendon shot in side; autopsy refutes witness account (2/19/17)23
- Jackson board votes to demolish high school building if bond issue passes (2/15/17)24
- Cape officer shoots man inside a home (2/16/17)7
- Business notebook: Owners ready to roll out the Barrel 131 (2/20/17)3
- Apparent punch at girls basketball game propels lawmaker into action (2/21/17)4
- Former Cape cop indicted on possessing child porn (2/17/17)
- Man dies after being shot by officer; said to have come at cop with knife (2/16/17)29
- Ray's of Kelso to close, then reopen under new ownership (2/16/17)6
The right of ordinary citizens
To the editor:
Recently John C. Bierk of Cape Girardeau took the U.S. Supreme Court to task for granting us all (with restrictions) the right to keep and bear arms instead of limiting that right to a militia. My dictionary shows its first definition of "militia" as "an army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers." So who in our Founding Fathers' day would make up that army? It would be anyone not too young, too old or too disabled to serve in a militia. What that not be the same today?
Any of us should be able to answer a call to duty should conditions be such that we needed to defend ourselves from a government seeking to deprive us of our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That is all that our government is empowered to do, other than protect our coin and borders, in the first place. Are we not, then, those who would make up a needed militia? Are we not the ordinary citizens who have a right to keep and bear arms?
LARRY BRADEN, Sikeston, Mo.