# Gunning for Guns



## SuckLead (Jul 4, 2006)

I'm sorry to say that the disillusioned man who wrote this lives in my state. From the News and Observer:



> Your Sept. 3 editorial "Life-saving talk," the Kaine report on the massacre at Virginia Tech and all the analysis has been helpful. The report shows the failures of the university administration and the campus police and the misinterpretation of "privacy policies," all of which contributed to the tragic event that took the lives of 33 students and faculty.
> 
> This tragedy, Columbine, the five young Amish school girls and other multiple murders get headlines and shock us. University administrators will no doubt improve procedures, and campus police will become more diligent, but the real problem will go unaddressed: the easy accessibility of guns.
> 
> ...


http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/letters/story/706425.html


----------



## SuckLead (Jul 4, 2006)

P.S. I sent the following to be considered for the editorial section of the same paper. What do you think?



> I would like to remind the readers of this newspaper of something. That something is the Constitution and its Amendments. This day and age we seem to have forgotten the words penned by Thomas Jefferson so long ago, what they meant, why our founding fathers felt they needed to be there, and how they all tie together. Let's use NC's many housing developments as an example. If someone breaks a bylaw put in place to keep the community the way it is desired by those who live there and no one says anything about it, therefore letting them continue to break it, the rest of the bylaws are null and void because you can't enforce some and not others. The bylaws have no leg to stand on. The same goes for our Constitution. Should one Amendment be ignored, the rest shall shortly follow. After reading the comments about a total ban and buy back of all guns in the USA, I felt it was important to include this reminder. For if that were to happen today, tomorrow this section of the newspaper may no longer exist. That is the reason the Amendments were added for the people, all of them. Our founding fathers knew what this country should be about and how they wanted to live, that's why they came here in the first place. If one is done away with - any one, you chose - the rest don't have a leg to stand on. Think about it.


----------



## tgrogan (Sep 4, 2007)

As I always like to say:

You can't argue with THAT logic.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Your response is well-written (actually, his letter is well-written, too, just wrong).

I usually find better success advocating handgun ownership from the standpoint of social utility rather than constitutionality. Most people can't tell you what any of the Amendments mean, anyway, and only have the vaguest ideas about the Constitution. They can, however, easily understand being raped or assaulted by a criminal, or their kids murdered by some school shooter.


----------



## SuckLead (Jul 4, 2006)

Mike Barham said:


> Your response is well-written (actually, his letter is well-written, too, just wrong).
> 
> I usually find better success advocating handgun ownership from the standpoint of social utility rather than constitutionality. Most people can't tell you what any of the Amendments mean, anyway, and only have the vaguest ideas about the Constitution. They can, however, easily understand being raped or assaulted by a criminal, or their kids murdered by some school shooter.


I agree. I did write out several from those standpoints, but when I read them to myself they sounded juvenile (some needed more than the 200 words allowed, also). I couldn't seem to word it correctly and I sounded like I was whining. No fault in the arguement just my own weird limitation. I thought that one came out the best of the group, so I sent it.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

I saw that the other day. The N & O is RAGINGLY anti-gun and will print anything that is anti but nothing pro; like two weeks ago when they quoted the guy from the Brady Bunch saying all people need is a credit card and a grudge and they can get an assault weapon. Good luck getting that printed or even a response. I've sent in multiple letters to the editor about them being anti gun and have never even had the letter put up on the web site.


----------



## js (Jun 29, 2006)

> The answer is a total ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns and assault weapons and a buy-back of the millions of weapons already out there. That may sound extreme, but the gun violence in our country calls for extreme measures.
> 
> Cyrus B. King Sr.


maybe he's right... I'd much rather run a sword through someone like him... or slit his throat with a small blade... or better yet, with the right swing, Knock his head off his shoulders with a baseball bat...I can pick one of those up at Walmart, with cash.

he's right, guns are dangerous...

*sarcasm off*:smt083


----------



## neophyte (Aug 13, 2007)

*Happen*

SuckLead: Ma'am; you done good; and guess what?
I'm your neighbor from the "greater state of Mecklenburg" with the 'most' sought after 'liberal' daily paper; "Observer";[
Ma'am; We/I have/had many opportunities; on many different arguments; with local, national, regional, Senate, Congress, House, and State. The northern part of NC [Chapel Hill] houses most of the states "again'st" voters.

Qualifying myself; I am not a member of any gun organization, I am a NC concerned Citizen with Voter Rights. I happen to shoot, CC, and 'grumble' with stupidities of our Voted Officials.

The diatribe proposed by 'Cyrus B. King Sr.' actually/probably written?

We that are drawn into these arguments: should be aware
1. keeping 'Guns'in the for front 
2. keeping 'shooting' in the for front
3. keeping 'sad, sickened, folks in the for front
4. keeping 'Politicians' in the for front

Do I think that there happens to be certain 'people' that should not have "guns"
Do I think that there happens to be certain 'people' that should not have "cars"
Do I think that there happens to be certain 'people' that should not have "Children"
Do I think that there happens to be certain 'people' that should not have 'drugs'
Do I think that there happens to be certain 'people' that should not have 'alcohol' 
Without a doubt; my list is longer than this.
It is much to "convenient" for the 'Band Wagoners' what-evers to attack a simplistic thought. 
Applied Reasoning: 
Do I think that VT, Columbine, Amish girls, other atrocity's, by guns; is horrible. YES.
Do I think that the 'lady' driving her car on I85; reaching into the seat to retrieve her phone; looses control of car; drives through the center fence;
heads-on into a family; coming from a Wedding; is horrible? [past week]
Do I think that the 'man' drunk passed out on the rail-road; gets run over by the train and killed; is horrible? [this past week]

Which is worse? Sadly the "Family's" in all cases will spend the rest of there life without a 'loved one'
Do we blame; Do we jump to conclusions; Do we close our minds; Do we buy into "Band Wagoners" diatribes.
Folks; when we see something, someone, our neighbor, friend, politician, ignorance, 
"We as reasonable individuals" should and need to be there for them;
as a 'brother and sister' for the support that is needed

My diatribe of thought doesn't end;
Thank you; Craig


----------



## MLB (Oct 4, 2006)

Kudos to you SuckLead. By organizing your thoughts into an intelligently written commentary and providing it to the general public, you help dispel the common perception that most gun owners are dangerous, fringe members of society with a "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" mentality.

Railing at "the Anti's" with simple minded bumper sticker slogans is useless at best, and more often than not, counterproductive. If we present rational arguments, backed up with fact, I think it's likely that we can counteract the short-sighted "feel good" gun legislation that is usually well intentioned, but ultimately wrong-headed.


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

:smt076Typical lib-speak. You can't reason with idiots they just get mad and start hollering.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2007)

Let me begin by saying that these percentages are off the top of my head and aren't based on any facts that I know of but are more a representation of my point. 

As I see it:

25% of the populace owns firearms and are active in shooting and/or hunting. Most support gun rights and oppose new restrictions

25% are anti-gun and believe in stricter laws and outright gun bans and will never own firearms.

50% may or may not own firearms and go about their normal everyday life without giving gun issues much thought until something like a VT or Columbine occurs. Then the media will start beating the drum for bans and stricter laws and some in this group will be swayed.

I think Mike's point about the constitution is sadly true. The problem is if we try to express our views publically the media with it's liberal bias will ignore them and only publish/broadcast what they wish. There are some like FOX that are swimming against the current and that most likely accounts for it's huge popularity.

The answer I feel lies within the political system. We need to get like minded politicans elected and can help do this by supporting them in whatever manner that we have available. They all want money but if money is an issue donate time, express support for the candidate with letters to the editor in the local paper, and speak out at meetings urging member of your local gun clubs to vote. I am a life member of the NRA and North American Hunting Club and I'm not trying to start a debate on the efficacy of either of those organizations but helping our friends can't hurt. We all need to act both individually and collectively to elect our friends and keep fighting the good fight.


----------



## JimmySays (Jun 8, 2007)

js said:


> maybe he's right... I'd much rather run a sword through someone like him... or slit his throat with a small blade... or better yet, with the right swing, Knock his head off his shoulders with a baseball bat...I can pick one of those up at Walmart, with cash.
> 
> he's right, guns are dangerous...
> 
> *sarcasm off*:smt083


 Got a good belly laugh to get my day started. :smt082:smt082


----------



## James NM (Jan 4, 2007)

Hey Sucklead, I think you ought to forward Mr. Cyrus B. King Sr.'s letter to the DNC, so they can give him the nomination. I'm tired of looking at Obama, Hillary, Edwards. At least Mr. King is honest about his intentions towards our guns.


----------



## Spartan (Jan 1, 2007)

The point I frequently make to those who disagree with being able to purchase a gun, is that 'bad guys' are ALWAYS going to get their hands on something. Making guns illegal to regular, law-abiding citizens, is not going to detour or make it any more difficult for 'bad guys' to get them.

If that Cho f*ck didn't go to a store and buy one, he would have gotten one from somewhere else; those Columbine cowards obviously weren't even old enough to purchase a gun, so they got theirs illegally too. 

It's a difficult, thin red line, unfortunately.


----------



## SuckLead (Jul 4, 2006)

Spartan said:


> If that Cho f*ck didn't go to a store and buy one, he would have gotten one from somewhere else; those Columbine cowards obviously weren't even old enough to purchase a gun, so they got theirs illegally too.
> 
> It's a difficult, thin red line, unfortunately.


And no one thinks of that. The American people are too pre-occupied with blaming everything/one but the one who deserves it, so we'll attack gun owners the country over, gun shops, gun makers, video games, Hollywood, the local authorities, terrorists, dancing monkies.... whatever. Anything that can be grasped. I agree with the VT shooter being labeled crazy and saying he should not have gotten a gun. But people don't recall the crazy guy at UNC who couldn't get a gun so he ran over everyone with his SUV instead! So it would be nice if the feel good, granola bar crowd taking over our country could pull themselves from their yoga, palates, or tantric meditation for a few minutes and see reality the way you do. Thanks!

TerryP: I do agree. I am a member of the NRA, GOA, Grass Roots NC, and The Second Amendment Foundation, and I give when I have a few extra dollars to spare. I have a tendency to use my position in a gun shop to make people aware of current legislation by fitting it into conversations ("Hey, have you heard about HR 1022? No? Well..."). I get involved like a crazy person with candidates, I actually am currently running the website for a local candidate in my town and while small it is something. I support where I can larger candidates, even just by telling people about them. So I do agree. But, as I said to Mike, I wrote a few letters I wanted to send in and chose the one that read the best. To me, this one sounded the most professional, the most well thought out, and it was a good foot to put forward to represent NC's gun owners. I will probably send more from here on out, just because, with various arguements. I just like to keep the general public reminded of these things mostly because if someone actually does think about it, maybe they will join us in supporting candidates who support our Constitution.


----------



## js (Jun 29, 2006)

JimmySays said:


> Got a good belly laugh to get my day started. :smt082:smt082


:smt023

Maybe we should send this link to Mr. Cyrus B. King Sr...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20844553/

I'm just sayin'... Popcornsmilie


----------



## SuckLead (Jul 4, 2006)

Update: Didn't grace their pages today, I'll give it a few more days before deciding they aren't going to print it.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

SuckLead said:


> Update: Didn't grace their pages today, I'll give it a few more days before deciding they aren't going to print it.


Don't hold your breath. They're liberal and anti, I'd be very surprised if they print it. Even when that Strickland kid got killed by the cop (after he beat up a kid and stole 2 of his PS3s AND posted pics of himself and his buddies on the internet with various guns), the News and Disturber made it a point to say he was "gunned down" by the police and they even pointed out how they shot the dog too like they were innocent victims of the cops. :smt076

I'm very close to canceling my subscription because of their one-way reporting.


----------



## zimman20 (Sep 4, 2007)

Do it. But be sure to let them know why. Subscribe to another paper...maybe the Rhino Times? :mrgreen:

I pick up the Charlotte 'Disturber' (Observer) anonymously because they're such a left-leaning POS. I do want to know what's going on in the region, though...have to make choices. I LMAO when I see any newspaper crying about circulation being down....or ABC/NBC/CBS, et al. crying about their viewership being down. We know exactly who they are and the way we show our disgust for them is to not support them. Not difficult to understand. :smt102


----------



## MLB (Oct 4, 2006)

You may have to wait a bit. My letter to the editor took about 2 weeks to be printed.


----------



## SuckLead (Jul 4, 2006)

MLB said:


> You may have to wait a bit. My letter to the editor took about 2 weeks to be printed.


Hm. OK, I'll keep that in mind. But like some above have mentioned, I'll be shocked if it ever gets in there.


----------

