Letter to the Editor
I maintain a website for a friend called "FirearmsRights.com". It deals mainly with Second Amendment issues, promotes our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and hosts articles relating to gun-owners' rights and the destruction of our Constitution by our "leaders" in general. The following is a letter we received from a concerned citizen. My responses to her points and questions appear in blue. Webmaster -J
The Editor's reply is posted on the FirearmsRights site.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 3:24 PM
To whom this may concern,
After reading your website, (it was sent to me, I did not look for it on my own) I felt the need to write this letter. Why don't we just start selling automatic weapons to every Joe Shmo degenerate that walks through a gun dealer? What's wrong with that? Right? Wrong. I beg your pardon, but I don't recall writing or posting anything suggesting that "we" start selling automatic weapons to "degenerates". One must possess a Class II Federal Firearms License to purchase an automatic weapon (I don't agree with this, but it is the Law). Automatic weapons don't kill people, people kill people. Right? Correct. Why should the government put up checks to make sure criminals don't buy weapons when that infringes on your precious gun buying power? Right? Well, sort of. There are methods employed that attempt to keep criminals from obtaining weapons, just as there are methods employed that attempt to keep drunks from getting behind the wheel of an automobile. But to insure that neither ever happened would infringe on numerous Constitutional Rights. However it is a fact that locales with less restrictive gun laws have far lower crime rates. Criminals would much rather face unarmed victims. Don't take my word for it. Look it up. Do your writers even think before they start tapping away at their keyboards? I haven't the foggiest notion what "my writers" think before they begin tapping away at their keyboards. I do know that I agree with most of what they have come up with as a finished product. Since your website seems full of sarcasm I figured I had to lower myself to write that first paragraph in a such a way that you all could understand it. I do so very much like sarcasm. One need not "lower" themselves in order to use sarcasm, irony, or hyperbole to make a point.
The article on the happenings at Fort Campbell, KY seemed exaggerated at the least. The author continually made assumptions on how the person being interviewed felt about what they were doing. He then tried to make his weak assumptions sound like facts. Stating that we can look forward to toll booths and martial law. He is obviously a drama queen. Perhaps. But I am concerned nonetheless. People have been predicting (Robert Heinlein, for example) this sort of thing since before the Cold War. However, recent happenings have opened discussion in Congress about instituting just such measures. I watch CNN daily and have not seen nor heard ANY soldier proclaim, "Hail to the Republic!" Nor will you ever. Not from CNN, ABC, CBS, or even Fox News. You will only hear what those who are paid to tell you what to think are paid to tell you. Try watching C-SPAN. Pay attention to what our government is doing rather than what the talking heads are selling.
When I went further into your website I read a very interesting definition on sheeple. In it, it states that sheeple believe anything that is on the television. Are you saying that the people who read your website are the same if they believe every article you post? Yes. I think that would apply to them also. I am inclined to agree with you. I certainly don't expect people who don't know me to take me at my word. You also may have noticed that some articles contain links to supporting evidence of claims made, as well as educational documents posted on our "Links" page.
By saying that more guns will stop violence is the same as hitting a child that hit another child saying,"you don't hit other people,"(smack). Not really. Simply having more guns won't stop or cause violence. By the same token, neither will having fewer guns. I (and I hope, our site) promote the ownership and use of firearms for defensive purposes (among other things unrelated to violence, such as target shooting and various other sporting and recreational activities). This analogy of yours brings to mind the question "Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?" Actually, we don't. We kill people who kill innocent people to prevent them killing more innocent people. Two wrongs don't make a right. True. I am not against guns, I'm against people like you having guns. Ooh. Cut me to the quick. People like me? You don't even know me. This website seems to promote 'trigger happy' citizens. This website's primary purpose is to promote the Second Amendment protection of American Citizens' right to keep and bear arms, and to a lesser degree, awareness of what our government is doing to restrict and remove our rights "for our protection". I do have a college education and an open mind. I just couldn't believe a website could be filled with such ignorance. Pass. If you don't like the government so much or it's policies, move somewhere else. I've no desire to live somewhere else. I live in a country where the goverment was intended to be "of, by and for the People". Our government gives you that right. Sorry. Our goverment gives us no rights. Our rights pre-exist our government. They are supposedly protected from our government by our Constitution. Lately, that seems to not be the case.
By the way, on your homepage you spelled opinion wrong. It's not spelled opnion. Thanks for the "heads up", it's fixed now. I doubt this letter will be on your site since it doesn't conform to what you want everyone to believe. I've no problem with dissenting opnions (hehe). I enjoy having a mind of my own. As do I.
A concerned citizen
Thank you for your comments.