I would like to thank Diane Rudolph and the editors of The Herald for printing the article “Gun nuts misunderstand meaning of the Constitution” in Saturday’s edition. This hysterical, vein-popping, ad hominem rant has provided law-abiding gun owners with all of the incentive they will ever need to be vigilant in protecting their Bill of Rights, in general, and their Second Amendment rights, in particular.

Coaches of sports teams dream of this kind of “bulletin board” material, which they use to avoid complacency and to energize their players on to victory. If there were ever a “clip and save” article for gun owners, this is it.

It is difficult to pick out Rudolph’s main points through all of the name calling and venom spewing, but one of those points may have been the notion that gun owners, who claim self defense, actually may want to challenge the federal government with their firearms. Although the founders clearly intended the Second Amendment to serve as a deterrent to a tyrannical federal government, Rudolph, with emotions pouring all over the page, informs us that we had better think twice about this plot because the federal government has a military that will wipe the floor with us.

What she doesn't tell us is how she proposes to get our children who are in uniform to fire on their parents and loved ones in protecting a tyrannical government.

Treason was committed against King George in the founding of the United States, and the rights of man were established as the supreme principle behind all of the founding documents. Because of these documents, law-abiding citizens do not owe anyone an explanation as to what weapons they choose to defend themselves with.

Diane Rudolph's tantrum is with human nature not with the firearms. The gun doesn't do the killing, people do. Now tell us about your proposal to change human nature, Ms. Rudolph ... we’re listening.

Vance Barnhill

York