To the editor:
I read a short statement from our governor on House Bill 436. “As a gun owner and supporter of the Second Amendment,” he said, “I applaud the bipartisan vote in the Senate to sustain my veto of this unnecessary, unconstitutional and unsafe nullification bill.”
“Unnecessary?” I guess a governor busy with his own DOR/REAL ID scandal might have not have noticed the scandals with the NSA, IRS, Fast and Furious, etc., or some of the president’s recent gun control executive orders. Nope, no gun control threat from the Feds.
“Unconstitutional,” he says because of a provision that’s clearly intended to protect the privacy rights of gun owners. Make no mistake, the publishing provision in HB 436 was poorly worded and should have been removed or fixed, but “unconstitutional?”
The governor called HB 436 “unsafe.” If the governor thinks it’s “unsafe” to make law enforcement officials accountable for infringing on the rights of the people, then he must not know much about history. Virtually every advanced civilization in history eventually devolved into a despotic state with police or military oppression of the people.
Was the governor’s beyond-the-pale statement hyperbole or one more indication that he really just doesn’t understand that protecting the liberty of the people is the “principal office of government.”