Do you know what happens when a man with a flawed character attains high military rank? You end up with an arrogant, verbally abusive individual who constantly attempts to sadistically demean all those he perceives to be of lesser rank.
Recently a frequent correspondent arguably disgraced the uniform he once wore by making coarse and obnoxious comments about firearms owners. The public use of such language is both indecent and indecorous (see UCMJ Article 133). In addition to the vulgar nature of his remarks, the correspondent deliberately misstated the point of my letter.
The substance of my letter dealt with Barack Obama’s unilateral use of executive orders to limit the scope of the second amendment. If the second amendment is to significantly modified at all, those changes are to occur through constitutional amendment, and not by executive orders.
On a personal note, almost 40 years ago an intruder attempted to burglarize my home. I, however, was there to meet him with my rifle. As he literally fell into my home, I held him at gunpoint. Had I not been armed, I would have been the one at his mercy. Because of this experience, perhaps the second amendment does mean more to me that it does to others.
The ex-military correspondent I speak of is free to express whatever opinion the BND may deem allowable under its publication standards. I would hope, however, the vulgarities and unnecessary personal attacks would no longer be included within his submissions.
Chris Tabing, Coulterville