Letters to Editor copy/paste bank

[labgrade]

Here we go.

Break out the keyboard & give us some juicy stuff to use for our own letters to the editor or polititians.

****************************
Added by DC: Here is the development thread for this "bank": http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=25108

[This message has been edited by DC (edited February 10, 2000).]

 

[Monkeyleg]

The Journal Sentinel's Dec. 22 article "Few illegal gun buyers prosecuted" illustrated well the dichotomy of the gun control argument: While more gun control laws
are being enacted, fewer gun control laws are being enforced.

This situation isn't unique to Wisconsin; it is occurring nationwide. Of the supposed 400,000 felons stopped from purchasing guns by the Brady Law, only a
handful have been prosecuted. In fact, since 1992, the number of violations of federal gun control laws sent to prosecutors has declined by more than 53%.

Do background checks deter crime? Or waiting periods? Gun-free school zones? How about assault weapon bans? Or bans on Saturday Night Specials?

Perhaps we need a moratorium on enacting new gun control laws while we judge the effectiveness of existing laws using the most accurate criterion available:
enforcement.

<< Richard Baker>>
Milwaukee

 

[Monkeyleg]

The Journal Sentinel's Sept. 11th article on Project Exile in Richmond,
VA highlighted a watershed event: for the first time in US history,
federal gun laws are being enforced on a significant scale, and
successfully so. Sentences for violating federal gun laws can range from
five years to even life in prison.

Project Exile is a simple concept--do the crime, do the time--yet the
White House does not seem to grasp it. When Congress appropriated $50
million to take the program nationwide, the President slashed that
amount to $5 million, opting instead to provide $15 million for a purely
cosmetic gun buy-back program.

It is sadly hypocritical that Mr. Clinton, who has never met a gun control
law he didn't like, has no desire to enforce existing federal gun laws. He
has boasted that 700,000 felons have been stopped from buying a gun
under the Brady Law, yet less than a dozen have been prosecuted, even
though lying on the Brady check carries a penalty of ten years in prison.
The other 699,988 presumably were just told to go home.

Could it be that his gun control proposals have as their target the
law-abiding, and not the criminals?

 

[labgrade]

The beauty of the copy/paste bit is that you can snag only those catch phrases that you really like & from several different postings - create your own VERY effective letter. Even grab 'em & slightly change to match your own style.

I'd dare say, that if we get a few replies here, through the magic of a true symbiotic relationship, we could do one hell of a note that says "just say no," very effectively.

Last one to The CO Guv ...

"Dear Sir:

Thank you for your reply regarding my wife’s and my e-mails regarding your five "common sense measures" regarding firearms.

Being fully aware of your views on this matter is exactly why I was a main organizer of the demonstration at the Governor’s Mansion last evening.

They are not "common sense" and will do nothing to ensure the safety of the citizens of Colorado. They are pure political posturing and if, enacted, a further erosion on our (supposed) guaranteed rights as law-abiding citizens. For clarification, I refer you to the following.

"ARTICLE II
Bill of Rights

(this section cut for brevity in this post
BTW, do a link/bookmark/favorites to your state's constitution so you can cut/paste into your letters)

You, Sir, swore an oath to defend and protect ALL portions of the Constitution. Picking and choosing between those rights you would sully in an attempt at "feel good" legislation will surely result in alienating the very constituency on which the Colorado Republican party so heavily depends.

I will never again remain silent on this matter, nor will I vote for any person who would support such infringements.

"What are they going to do? Vote Democrat?" you are quoted as saying. Yes, Sir. Democrat, Republican or Independent – it matters not to me as long as we have honest politicians.

I yearn for the day when one single politician has the fortitude to publicly stand up before the people, tell the truth and state that more laws aren’t going to provide for their safety. It is we, the people, who provide for our own safety by being law-abiding and a moral people. That, and the right to defend ourselves should the dire situation arise.

My rights are not subject to the whims of the popular vote nor to anyone else who may think "it’s a good idea."

I will use every legal avenue available to ensure any who support such nonsense look for honest work.

Sincerely,

Alan Albertus"

(& too, there should be a link on your state's main page that gives you addresses (sometime their home address which seems pretty effective) of all House/Senate members. That can be cut/paste to CC in e-mailings OR a group contact (better) in MSOutlook, etc. Every SEND goes to 100s of folks at once as it did with this letter.
Put 'em in CC (not BCC) so they get to see who it goes to - all of 'em!

 

[labgrade]

A response to our CO state coord for MMM/in RMN 2/6 ...

"Letters to the Editor: 2/6/00

Ms. Hopkins (2/6/00 - The world has changed and we must change, too) is scared of guns. She shouldn’t be scared of guns, she should be scared of criminals.

Is she also scared of cars? They kill far more people than do firearms. And, yes, they kill because they are misused by people.

Ah, "But cars are a necessity of the modern world." Well, most assuredly they are and so are firearms. Firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens save far more people from criminal attack than are they used for criminal activity.

Firearms are inanimate objects and cannot kill of their own volition. Nor can cars, knives, or other inanimate objects. They must be wielded by a person - for either harm or good.

Too true, we no longer live in the Old West. The Old West had persons of moral fortitude who, rather than cowering in their beds at night, slept peacefully, knowing they had the required tools to defend their own lives. These "tools" as she so aptly put are still necessary for honest citizens to protect their own lives - inside AND outside of our homes.

Yes, we must change, Kathleen. We must decide that rather than sniveling under
the sheets, we defend our own lives and those of our children rather than leaving it
up to someone else.

Kathleen isn’t scared of guns. She’s scared of you."

 

[labgrade]

To six different LtE & as with the group mailings - dump 'em to a few more group contacts as well .... a few kudos for this one ...

Inform the public & still, place a seed of doubt in the otherwise "reasonable, safety measures" proposals. Have already caused two big-time antis with this type arguement.

"Letters to the Editor: 2/6/00

Governor Owens should be ashamed of himself. And so should you for buying into
any of the most recent spat of people control laws.

1) Straw purchases are already illegal under law.

2) "Juvenile records included for firearms purchase" as written would prevent an adult
from purchasing any firearm because he/she might have been "busted" for carrying a nail-clipper (prohibited weapon) to school upon a time.

3) "Safe storage" is ill-conceived. Shall we too be required to "safe-store" our matches/lighters, household chemicals, lawn mowers, and the particularly insidious kitchen knife?

4) "Gun show loophole" Firearms purchased from licensed dealers (there’s no such thing
as an "unlicensed dealer") already require the NICS (background) check. The "gun show
loophole" non-entity proposal is another step in the state’s attempt to regulate the transfer of private property.

5) Handgun sales to persons 18-21 is already against the law. You propose to make it more illegal?

And, friends and neighbors, each of the "common sense" bills being proposed have nasty, poison pills buried in their text. As reported, you only get to see the main title and it all sounds so reasonable. It isn’t.

Don’t believe it? Go to http://www.leg.state.co.us/pubhome.nsf &and check the bills’ wording yourself.

In one of the "safe storage" bills, you may have committed a felony by handing your 20-year old daughter an unloaded .22 rifle in your own home.

Responsibility cannot be legislated. Responsible people don’t need the added legislation as they already are. And the irresponsible will always be.

His five "reasonable, common-sense, gun safety" measures are none of the above.

He has stated himself that these proposals, if previously enacted, would have done
nothing to prevent the tragedy at Columbine.

OK, Bill, what are they supposed to accomplish? ‘Fess up, now. What are you up to?"

 

[ernest2]

This thread is only for letters...as was agreed to in the development thread. Not chit chat or comments.

This is to have examples so others may use when writing. A brief explanatory statement for context and then the letter...only.

[This message has been edited by DC (edited February 10, 2000).]

 

[jimpeel]

My letter to the editor of the Rocky Mountain News (Denver) on the article posted at http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=25129 :

Re: Arms race? Make mine a musket (2-8-00)

In his article, Gene Amole states that the founders of this nation could not foresee many things having to do with the advancing technology of
firearms.

What they really did not foresee was that there would be Americans, especially those for whom a special place was reserved in the First
Amendment, who would so little appreciate their sacrifices that they would have the audacity to suggest that they would hold the desire for a
cocktail in higher precedence than their “lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor”.

Yes, Mr. Amole, as they “picked up a quill pen” they had no idea that the author of the future would hold a ball point pen in its place, and;

Yes, Mr. Amole, they could not have known about machine guns – just as they could not have known about word processors that can capture
the printed word as fast as the fingers can type them, and;

Yes, Mr. Amole, they would, indeed, be incredulous at the firepower of these weapons – just as they would be incredulous at the power of the
Internet, and;

Yes, Mr. Amole, they would be incredulous at your short-sided sense of history, and your willingness to discard their sacrifices, and all who
followed, to make sure you kept your freedom to disparage their finest effort in their finest hour.

Sincerely,

Jim Peel

------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.


[This message has been edited by jimpeel (edited February 08, 2000).]

 

[DC]

This is in response to "Target shooters' father does not like military rifles" in the Gen'l forum. The reporter misquoted and twisted comments of Middleton Tompkins, and made him look like an elitist. When thought about, I can see Tompkins merely talking about the unsuitability of stock military battle rifles as precision target rifles...ala a stock Chevy Monte Carlo being unsuitable for the Indy 500


Arizona Republic and the
reporter William.Hermann@Arizona Republic.com

Sir:
RE:U.S. champions in long-range target
events...Feb 6, 2000
Your article on the Tompkin's was full of misquotes and subtle out
of context statements. What began as an article about target
shooting by teenage girls, ended as a political indictment of
firearms in general.

Most Americans grew up believing that what we read in a
newspaper was true...naive, yes...as we get older we realize that
we can't just read and accept. Now we read and must analyze,
look for an agenda, look between the lines; even if the story or
article is about an innocuous topic. Credibility is the only currency
that journalists and reporters have. When abused the reporter
and the parent journal are branded liars and become of no use.
You, sir, are a great contributor and a causal factor in the
growing cynicism and mistrust in this country. You and the
Arizona Republic have lost your currency.
Dona Cicci
Paso Robles, CA

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!

 

[Monkeyleg]

The Februay 19th "Weekly Laurels and Laments" column ridiculed proposed concealed weapons carry legislation as
a "mad drive to turn Wisconsin into the wild, gunslinging West."

Rhetorical flourishes aside,the Journal Sentinel's position is without basis in fact. In each of the 31 states that have
shall-issue permits, the number of revocations of permits for _any_ type of firearms-related offenses is miniscule
compared to firearms offenses by general public. In Florida, for example, only .02% of all permits have been
revoked for offenses such as carrying in a restaurant that serves alcohol.

Clearly, permit holders have acted reasonably and responsibly, and have helped concealed carry states boast a violent
crime rate that is 24% lower than non-carry states. CCW laws make criminals wonder whether their intended victims
are indeed defenseless.

Opponents of concealed carry presume that a citizen who has always followed society's rules will, if allowed to carry
a weapon, suddenly be transformed into a murderous Jesse James. Such an absurd notion is not only a slap in the face
to the law-abiding, but it also sends a sobering message to those honest folks who work hard to provide for their
families' welfare and safety: we don't trust you.

Dick Baker

 

[jimpeel]

Hope I'm doing this right. The thread body does not say that the letter has to be current, just posted for idea content and text copying. The following was printed in the Attleboro (MA) Sun Chronicle in response to a Letter to the Editor by Josh Sugarman lambasting Eddie Eagle as a shill for the gun industry. Some of the numbers will need to be massaged as this is from 1998.

I release all content without exception or attribution.


Re: Beware of Joe Camels dressed in eagle’s wings (3-26-98)

Dear Sirs,

"STOP! Don't Touch. Leave The Area. Tell An Adult."

What is it about those words of instruction to a child who encounters a firearm that so incenses Josh Sugarman and the Violence Policy Center? Statistics. Statistics that bear out the following:

The annual number of accidental firearm fatalities nationally has decreased 56% since 1930 while the population doubled and the number of firearms quadrupled.

From 1979 to 1995 fatal firearm accidents dropped from 2,004 to 1,225.

Firearms are involved in only 1.5% of accidental fatalities nationwide.

According to the National Safety Council, the number of fatal firearm accidents among children in 1995 (latest available data) represents a 64% decrease from an all-time high in 1975. The fatal firearms accident rate is at an all-time low, since record keeping began in 1903.

The 200 fatal firearm accidents among children in 1995 were 3% of the 6,600 fatal accidents among children.

While Josh Sugarman and his ilk have been bad-mouthing the NRA and the Eddie Eagle program the NRA has, in the past 8 years, spent 100 million dollars on firearms safety programs for all segments of the population. At the same time the Eddie Eagle program has gleaned numerous awards nationwide.

Would Josh Sugarman attempt to cloud this issue with false and misleading rhetoric to confuse the public and advance his own agenda? Judge for yourself.

This from Sugarman’s March 1989 paper called, ‘Assault Weapons: Analysis, New Research and Legislation.’

"Assault weapons...are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons -- anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun -- can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."

Yes, Josh Sugarman needs our children to be a statistics. He needs high numbers to justify the existence of his organization. To what extremes will he and his organization go to achieve them?

 

[jimpeel]

When you get one of these nuts that says that only the police should have <hand>guns, use this. It is part of an editorial opinion piece I wrote for and was printed in the Attleboro Sun Chronicle.

Areas of change are bolded.

I release this in its entirety to the public domain.

Mr./Ms./Mrs. <fill in blank> goes on to recommend the banning of all guns in private hands. He/she wants the police to be the only ones to have them. Would those be the same police that kicked in the wrong door and caused a 70 year old minister to have a heart attack and die? That caused the deaths of 20 children at Waco, TX for their own protection? That shot a mother holding a 10 month old baby after the rules of engagement were illegally changed? That have regularly shaken down black motorists on Hwy. 95 in Florida? That went on a drunken rampage in Los Angeles firing their weapons at signs, street lights, and a California Highway Patrolman? That broke into the home of Donald Scott in Malibu, CA and shot him to death in a botched seizure raid that netted nothing but the death of Mr. Scott? That fled from the scene of the Los Angeles riots leaving the people to fend for themselves with privately held firearms? Are these the same police who starred in the corruption investigations of the Knapp, Mollen, and Christopher Commissions?

Would these be the same police that have been turned into bounty hunters by the seizure and forfeiture laws? The same police that have had seizures projected into their budgets so moneys can be supplanted elsewhere thereby forcing officers to seek out the funds through seizures to make up the shortfall? Or perhaps the type of police who testified in the Whitey Bulger and Stephen Flemmi trial in Boston who took gifts and payoffs and allowed murders and other criminal activities to occur and go unpunished?

In ‘The Development of the American Police: An Historical Overview’, Craig Uchida notes that "If there is a common theme that can be used to characterize the police in the 19th Century, it is the large-scale corruption that occurred in most police departments across the United States" (Uchida, 1993). In ‘Forces of Deviance: Understanding the Dark Side of Policing’, Kappeler, Sluder, and Alpert point out that corruption among police is not new or peculiar to the late 20th century. "To study the history of police is to study police deviance, corruption and misconduct." (Kappeler et al., 1994.) These are the people that Mr./Ms./Mrs. <fill in blank> wants to be the only armed people in America. He/she ignores the fact that those who hold a monopoly on guns will also hold a monopoly on gun violence. Who will protect us from those who protect us, Mr./Ms./Mrs. <fill in blank>?