Editorial Response - Opinions Wanted

Status
Not open for further replies.

COMPNOR

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
419
Location
Missouri
Good evening,

So a few weeks ago this editorial appeared in my local paper:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinio...cle_8b74c4ae-f2bc-5976-b547-60381375af88.html

I generally don't like writing "Letters to the Editor" because opinions are like *******s, everyone has one and they all stink. But lately I feel the need to at least do something, especially when something is so one sided or incorrect.

So here was my response:

Mr. Robberson,

In response to your column "Urban survival tips for St. Louisans concerned about crime" and your opinion on guns, I quote:

"First, let me make clear that guns are not the answer. I managed to survive years in the most dangerous cities on earth without ever having carried a firearm. No matter how Rambo-tough you imagine yourself to be, you will not outdraw a person who has taken you by surprise and is already pointing a gun at you. Do not give that person a reason to pull the trigger."

First, congratulations on surviving some of the most dangerous cities without ever having carried a firearm. I'm sure there are more people with similar experiences. There are also people who haven't survived, through no fault of their own. Would things have turned out differently (for better or worse) if the victim had been carrying? We can only speculate.

Second, contrary to what you and the internet like to think and since we are giving opinions, the majority of people who choose to conceal carry are not trying to be "Rambo-tough." They have made a conscious decision to carry a firearm for personal protection with the hopes of never having to use it, but acknowledging the fact that a situation might arise in which they will need to apply deadly force. Sure there is a lot of rhetoric, especially on the internet. But the smallest groups typically make the most noise. As for being able to out draw, again that's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. But when it comes down to it, the choice belongs to the potential victim, not you. And there are certainly stories about people out-drawing the attacker, and I believe your P-D has even posted about them.

Lastly, criminals do not need a reason to pull the trigger. They will do it whether or not the victim is carrying a firearm or not. One only need to look at the shootings around Busch Stadium or the horrific carjacking on Washington Avenue to see that. Were those victims armed? Were they complying with their attackers?

Your editorial also refuses to acknowledge dozens of different scenarios where the attacker might not have a gun. Or might not yet have it pointed. Or there might be multiple assailants. Deadly force is not simply limited to firearms. And the decision to employ deadly force is easy to Monday morning quarterback. But in that moment, at that time, only the person standing there knows what is best, and has to live with the consequences of their decisison. You can have twelve different scenarios with twelve different outcomes, all based on the choices twelve different people choose to make.

I recommend reading In the Gravest Extreme by Ayoob Massad. That is if you truly wish to have an informed opinion. You can choose to disagree with me. You can choose to disagree with Mr. Massad. But hopefully it will give you a different view to consider.


So.... thoughts? Something I should add or edit? Thanks for feed back.
 
COMPNOR

Well written, fairly clear and on point, but way too long. You would probably lose most readers after the second paragraph. Needs to be tightened up a bit and try to keep your rebuttal limited to just two or three key points.
 
Massad Ayoob

Yes, too long for a letter to be published. Also, agree that getting out alive is the whole point, but that sometimes you're given no choice but to fight when your wife or daughter are about to be taken, or your life.
 
Let me say that if the six dead adults at Sandy Hook could have a do-over, I'll bet they'd vote to have been armed.
 
Let me say that if the six dead adults at Sandy Hook could have a do-over, I'll bet they'd vote to have been armed.
Unfortunately, you might be surprised by some of their responses depending on their point of view. I've talked to urban dwellers who've said they'd rather die than have a gun and shoot somebody.

Seems counter intuitive, but true.
 
Unfortunately, you might be surprised by some of their responses depending on their point of view. I've talked to urban dwellers who've said they'd rather die than have a gun and shoot somebody.

As far as I'm concerned if they feel that way, they're free to act according to their beliefs. I just wish they were as accommodating in letting me live according to mine.
 
@hso - Thanks, I always mess his name him. I could look at it and five minutes later completely jack it up.

I agree it is long, but I'm not really sure how to shorten it. OR what points to focus on. The OP is complete tripe that I feel like boiling it down to a sound byte or talking point would make everyone miss the bigger picture.

The paper has been known to print longer letters, and realistically my intention wasn't so much for it to be published, but to get it to the desk of the editor. I'm going to send it to him directly as well as the board.

Thanks for the feedback.
 
Mr. Robberson,

In response to your column "Urban survival tips for St. Louisans concerned about crime" you said, "guns are not the answer. I managed to survive years in the most dangerous cities on earth without ever having carried a firearm.”

The majority of people who choose to conceal carry are not trying to be, as you say, "Rambo-tough." They hope never to use it. The choice belongs to the potential victim, not you. Give credit to the peaceful armed citizens who have bested attackers, with or without guns.

The decision to employ deadly force is easy to Monday morning quarterback, but only the person standing there knows what is best, and has to live with the consequences. You can have twelve different scenarios with twelve different outcomes, but you are sitting behind a computer, not in front of an assailant.

Read In the Gravest Extreme by Ayoob Massad. Nothing focuses an editorial writer better.
 
Unfortunately, you might be surprised by some of their responses depending on their point of view. I've talked to urban dwellers who've said they'd rather die than have a gun and shoot somebody.

Seems counter intuitive, but true.
I have heard that as well. I don't understand it but I guess if they want to allow a criminal to kill them and not fight back, it is their choice.
 
"I have heard that as well. I don't understand it but I guess if they want to allow a criminal to kill them and not fight back, it is their choice. "

Yup, my MIL. Funny how she changed her tune when I changed the hypothetical to the defense of her grand-kids.
 
I don't think these people are necessarily anti self defense it's just they can't fathom doing it with a gun.

In the comments of the OP a poster said something about guns weren't the answer but carries her keys around to be used as a weapon.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top