Voting more important than firearms

The massacre in Charleston has brought out the firearm control advocates, again. What is more astounding at the same time is that there is a group of citizens trying to compare firearm control to voter identification.

The comparison of voter laws to the ownership of firearm laws is like trying to compare a grapefruit to a grape with voter laws being the grapefruit and ownership of firearm laws being the grape.

The U.S. Constitution prevents infringements upon one’s right to own a firearm. The U.S. Constitution provides no such protection from infringement on one’s right to vote. The US Constitution in four cases states that one’s right to vote cannot be abridged because of race, sex, poll tax, or for those beyond 17 years of age. There are no other constitutional rights when it comes to your rights and qualifications to vote.

Voting is the most precious and valuable benefit we have as United States citizens. The requirements to insure who is voting should be much more stringent than the requirements to own a firearm. Our vote in and of itself is the most powerful tool we have to fight a tyranny. When voting will not stop the tyrant then we need the firearm. That is why our Founding Fathers worded the Second Amendment in the manner they did.

The U.S. Constitution leaves the control of voting to the states and as such North Carolina’s new election law does not oppress or suppress anyone’s vote. There are many Progressives and members of the Democratic Party that claim otherwise. Why they make such absurd claims will have to be answered by those who make such claims.

In the final results one’s right to own a firearm is less important that one’s right to vote. Voting should therefore require much more scrutiny than owning a firearm.

Ray Shamlin

Rocky Mount