[Kharn]

UDel's twice a week paper published a front-page article on Tuesday about a gun control forum that was held on campus last Thursday (for some reason, they didnt archive the article online). Of course, in typical college fashion, only the anti-gun view point was reported (the "forum" was a sham, it was all about how to increase gun control), so I wrote a letter to the editor and it was published in today's paper (Friday edition). I'm something like 2 for 2 or 2 for 3 now, I cant remember if I wrote a letter to the editor freshman year or not, but another one I sent in about ballistic fingerprinting was published last year around the time of the "DC Sniper."

Here's what they published (http://review.udel.edu/article.php?article_id=668):
Firearms cannot be blamed for the actions of criminals


I was disappointed to read the front-page article on Tuesday's paper entitled "Gun policy forum held," in which, only the anti-gun viewpoint was expressed.

No mention was made of the ability of a firearm to protect innocent life, or of the use of firearms for recreation, competition or hunting.

I am concerned about the attitude of the speakers, claiming that reducing the number of guns will make America safer.

If the claim is true, why are Chicago and Washington, D.C. two of the most crime-infested areas of our nation, when those two cities have the strictest gun control, including a total ban on the purchase and unregistered possession of handguns?

Criminals are, by definition, law-breakers. If they will not obey the law and refrain from assaulting, raping, killing and otherwise destroying innocent lives, how can they be expected to follow a new law restricting the ownership of firearms?

I dont think its half bad for ~20 minutes worth of writing, any thoughts?

Kharn

[HankB]

Pretty good - you can't write a novel in a letter to the editor, your comments have to be direct and pithy. I just would've added something to the effect of "The principle of free intellctual discourse ought to be sacrosanct at a university. Deliberately limiting a forum to only one side of an issue violates this principle, and implies a basic intolerance for diversity of thought."

[BamBam]

Kharn,
Good letter; thanks for stepping up to the plate.

I also like HankB's suggestion. But adding it may have ruined your chances of getting the letter published.

Good job

[Standing Wolf]

Well done and well written!