I’m afraid I have to disagree with my friends and colleagues on how everyone should vote on Amendment No. 2. 

While the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does provide ample protection of our gun rights, I think that any law that restricts any government’s power is a good thing.

I’ve talked and written about Amendment 2 until I was blue in the face, but this is something we should all take seriously.

This amendment has the power to change the way our state looks at guns.

Currently our state constitution says, “The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged, but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person.”

Funny thing about the conjunction “but” is that it’s a contradictory word. It basically cancels out what comes before it.

Example: I like you, BUT we should see other people.

The new amendment says, “The right of each citizen to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer and use arms for defense of life and liberty, and for all other legitimate purposes, is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed, and any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.”

They added some reasons for having a gun and took out the word “but” and replaced it with “and.”

This slight change makes a big difference.

It means that having a gun is a right, not a privilege, and any attempt by the government to infringe on that right will be dealt with by the highest form of judicial review.

Look at the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It’s very clear. But that hasn’t stopped places like D.C. and Chicago from instituting bans on guns or certain types of guns.

We don’t know what the future holds. It’s best to plan for the worst. One day a real dictator may actually take over, and we’ll need our state to protect our rights and us.

After all, the entire purpose of state governments is to check the Feds and vice versa.