Vice President Al Gore, in his acceptance of the Democratic nomination, spoke of his party as one of "the people," as opposed to the party of "the powerful." I would like to point out that government qualifies as "the powerful," and that what Gore represents is the Power of Government. Unfortunately, the power of government will know no bounds if Gore is elected. The reason is simple: Our firearm rights cannot bear another four years of attack. The Second Amendment is the only true guarantee of our Constitutional freedoms. Once it is gone (and it will be in all but name, should Gore win), what is to protect the others?

I submit to you that a leader that is truly for "the people" does not fear "the people" owning firearms; indeed, a leader for "the people" should insist that the right to own firearms remain strong, as a safeguard against "the powerful." Herein lies the crucial hypocrisy of Gore's platform.

I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I have never voted based on a single issue, but I must in this election, despite agreeing with many Democratic positions. Electing Al Gore is the surest way I can imagine to effectively nullify the Constitution.

In conclusion, as I read about Gore's acceptance speech, the difference between the Democratic and Republican parties finally struck me. Democrats represent "the powerful" in the form of government, and Republicans represent "the powerful" in the form of the rich. Isn't the two-party system beautiful?