Arrow-right Camera
Go to e-Edition Sign up for newsletters Customer service
Subscribe now
Opinion >  Letters

All amendments relevant

In regards to Shawn Vestal’s comments in yesterday’s Spokesman-Review regarding the U.S. Border Patrol retention of the Oregon comedian (“Searching for logic in 100-mile rule for Border Patrol,” Jan. 30), nowhere in his comments did he note that this legal immigrant was legally required to carry documentation proving he was in the country legally, which he did not have. Why didn’t he mention this?

Also, he made numerous comments regarding the disregard of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.

Mr. Vestal, the 100-mile limit was instigated to protect our country from illegal activity. Are you against that protection?

Where are your comments advocating the Second Amendment? A new law in Washington state will make me, a citizen born in the USA, a criminal if I do not keep my firearms locked, in my own home. If a criminal breaks into my house and steals them, I will be prosecuted as a criminal. Where are your comments condemning this law that disregards “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” portion of the Second Amendment?

You cannot pick and select only the parts of the Constitution that you deem appropriate. All amendments are relevant.

Fred Phillips

Chewelah, Wash.


Letters policy

The Spokesman-Review invites original letters of no more than 200 words on topics of public interest. Unfortunately, we don’t have space to publish all letters received, nor are we able to acknowledge their receipt. We accept no more than one letter a month from the same writer. Please remember to include your daytime phone number and street address. The Spokesman-Review retains the nonexclusive right to archive and re-publish any material submitted for publication.

Send letters to:
Letters to the Editor
The Spokesman-Review
999 W. Riverside Ave.
Spokane, WA 99201

Fax: (509) 459-3815
Questions?: (509) 459-5430