Skip to main content
You have permission to edit this article.
Letter: Reject gun proposition

Letter: Reject gun proposition


The Illinois ballot this year contains a proposition for Rock Island County that reads, "Should the Illinois General Assembly protect a citizen's right to keep and bear arms as defined by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution?"

Initially, I was inclined to vote "yes" on this proposition. Why would we not want Illinois state laws to conform to the U.S. Constitution?

After some research, I learned that the Rock Island County Republicans are responsible for putting this deceptively worded proposition on the ballot. Republicans claim (falsely) that Illinois state gun control laws are unconstitutional and want them repealed. These Illinois state laws improve background checks for all gun purchases, raise the legal age (and waiting period) to buy assault-style weapons, and ban sales of bump stocks and high capacity magazines. County Republicans hope to trick unsuspecting voters into voting for this proposition.

If the proposition passes, no Illinois state laws will change. But our county would be considered a "gun sanctuary" in Illinois, which could affect laws and policies implemented in our county. If enough Illinois counties adopt this proposition, Illinois state lawmakers could be influenced.

I cringe whenever I see American civilians dressed in combat gear openly carrying military grade assault weapons in public. There is no place in our democracy for such outrageous behavior.

We cannot control what happens in other states, but we can pass gun control laws in Illinois to protect our citizens. I urge everyone to please vote "no" on the Rock Island County proposition. Vote!

Richard Patterson



Catch the latest in Opinion

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

  • Updated

The White House recently threw Gov. Kim Reynolds under the bus regarding Iowa's response to COVID-19. She was criticized for her policies contributing to needless deaths, and skyrocketing positivity rates, some of the highest in the nation. So much for putting faith in Iowans making the right decisions. Who is really calling the shots in Iowa?

I doubt I am the only one who is exhausted by the financial and political corruption of the current Republican Party. As the saying goes, I’m sick and tired of being sick and tired. Given what they did to block Merrick Garland’s nomination four years ago, the current Supreme Court nomination process in Washington is so cynical that Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham aren’t even trying to cover up their hypocrisy.

The Quad-City Times' endorsement of Rep. Cheri Bustos states, "We are disappointed that, when we spoke with her, Bustos was somewhat evasive when confronted with certain issues." Bustos, you say, talked of support for an "ambitious" climate change plan but "we got little idea, despite our probing, what that might mean."

Donald Trump’s most often repeated claim in his reelection campaign is that he’s been a great job creator. To hear him talk, you’d think that job creation skyrocketed after he became president.

The best measure of human misery caused by the pandemic is the ratio of deaths to population. If we had the same ratio as Germany, we would have about 41,000 deaths; France, 167,000; if measured against Canada, it would be 87,000. Instead, we have over 225,000 and rising.

Synonyms for fair are impartial and equitable. The proposed “fair” tax is neither of those things, nor is it fair. The only fair tax is that everyone pays the exact same percentage, which is what is in the Illinois Constitution presently.

When The Dispatch-Argus, or any newspaper for that matter, endorses a candidate for president, is it the owner of the paper, one member of the editorial board, or all of them? In any case, who cares who four or five people like? Is their endorsement supposed to sway undecided voters or change the minds of those already committed to a particular candidate?

Anyone who wonders why so many among the very rich have traditionally supported communism while the working class has not should take a careful look at the cozy relationship of Colin Kaepernick and Nike, all made possible by the Chinese Communist Party. Nike reportedly generated $3 billion after pulling its Air Max 1 USA sneakers with its Betsy Ross flag design because Kaepernick said the flag was from an era of slavery. Instead of taking a financial hit, Nike stock shares soared. "What I am beginning to learn about Nike," said Kevin O'Leary of Shark Tank fame, "they know how to take controversy and blow it up into advertising".

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.


News Alerts

Breaking News