Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Important Editorial

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by damien, Aug 6, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. damien

    damien Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,212
    Location:
    Northern IL, USA
    I searched for the name of the writer and journal here and have not seen this posted yet.

    It is very rare to see an editorial go our way. Letters to the editor, for sure, but rarely does an editorial board support RKBA. This one is 100% in support and very well written and I think should be bookmarked in the minds of RKBA supporters.

    http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=18660461&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=569380&rfi=8

    Time to admit the 'gun nuts' are right
    By Keith C. Burris
    08/03/2007

    In the aftermath of the Petit family slayings in Cheshire, we all reached for explanations: How do human beings sink this low? How could this tragedy have been prevented? Why?

    There are so many nagging questions. They all need to be asked. And maybe some old arguments need to be hashed out again.

    Why not a more stringent "three strikes and you're out" law in this state? Connecticut's version is so weak that it's more like "30 strikes and we'll think about it while you strike again."

    Why not speed up the criminal trial process for repeat violent offenders? Get them off the streets. It's been proposed many times. Most people agree it should be done. It never happens.

    Can't we better monitor the probation process?

    Can't we do a better job of predicting -- figuring out which non-violent criminals are about to turn violent?

    Are home alarms really effective?

    How about dogs?

    But somehow all of these ideas pale before the barbarity of this particular crime.

    That is why one old question is worth asking again. It is this: What if the Second Amendment is for real? Is it possible that it should it be revered, just like the First Amendment?

    Sam Ervin said, "The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." Maybe that applies to all of the Constitution.

    Is it possible that the Second Amendment is not a quaint and antiquated remnant of a world that will never return, but an idea as relevant and sound today as when it was written?

    Is it possible that we are not talking about the right of the government to form a militia when there is no standing army, but the right of the individual to defend himself, or herself, against both tyranny and lawlessness? Maybe we are talking about the right of self-defense -- the right of the individual to take up arms against a government that wants to oppress, be it foreign or domestic. And the right of the individual to defend himself against criminals, brutes, and barbarians when local police seem unable to stop them.

    Might the Second Amendment matter almost as much as the First?

    I think the answer is yes.

    And just like the First, the Second is practical, newly relevant, and far wiser than the watered-down alternatives.

    I don't think George Bush wants to impose martial law on his fellow citizens. But he has diluted habeas corpus. And he has enlarged Big Brother. You have to stop and think about a government that wants to control the thoughts and behavior of its people.

    Should such a government be permitted to disarm them as well?

    And whereas the reform of the criminal justice system along some of the lines suggested above (a real "three strikes" law and faster trials for violent offenders) would not have saved the lives of Jennifer, and Hayley, and Michaela Petit, a gun might have.

    I don't say it would have.

    I say it might have.

    Had Dr. William Petit had access to a gun and known how to use it, he might have been able to dispatch the two perpetrators, who were armed with only an air gun and ropes.

    Moreover, the three victims here were women.

    What if Mrs. Hawke-Petit had been trained in the use of firearms? Suppose she had been able to get to a gun after her husband was beaten into unconsciousness by the invaders? Or when she was forced to take one captor to the bank to fetch him money?

    It's worth thinking about.

    Women and children are now the major targets of predators in our society. Government is not protecting them very well. Many professional women who work in cities know this and take courses in self-defense. A gun may be the only realistic self-defense against the sort of criminals we are talking about here.

    And if a few women took care of a few thugs in cases like this; if a few stories like this one ended in a different way -- with a woman blowing one of these brutes to kingdom come -- it might be a deterrent. Lives upon lives might be spared.

    A friend of mine said: "The gun nuts are back."

    They are.

    And they are right.

    Mind you, we are talking about arming people who are trained and know how to use a weapon.

    No one should have a gun who has not been trained.

    Just as one gets training in handling a boat, motorcycle, or car, one must learn how to use and safely store a gun. (The National Rifle Association maintains an extensive national network of programs in firearms training and education.)

    And, obviously, no one would be forced to own a gun.

    A second caveat: Encouraging citizens to arm themselves is no "answer" to crimes like the Petit murders.

    An "answer" does not exist.

    But it is one of several remedies when we are faced with palpable evil.

    All possible remedies should be on the table:

    -- Various reforms of the justice system, like a real three-strike-law for predatory offenders.

    -- Better psychological treatment for troubled youth.

    -- Religious training, in both love and self-restraint, especially when people are young.

    -- Prison programs that both retain the hard core and educate the educable.

    -- More and better home alarm systems.

    -- More cops visible in more neighborhoods.

    -- Dobermans.

    All of these approaches have merit.

    So does self-defense.

    None of these options "fix" a society that can produce human beings who torture and kill the defenseless for sport.

    No one step or program can plug every hole in America's justice system, or its soul.

    But there are times when a gun in the hands of a potential victim may save a life.

    Let's admit -- since the murderers, and druggies, and psychos, and thieves already have guns -- that arming the peaceful, law-abiding, decent, and productive people, whether in a school, or a private home, or on the way to a parked car, is an option that also has merit.

    --------

    Keith C. Burris is editorial page editor of the Journal Inquirer.
     
  2. ozwyn

    ozwyn Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    Maryland
    guess maybe eventually people do wake up. good work.
     
  3. fletcher

    fletcher Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,559
    Location:
    TX
    Well-written. Looks like we have another convert, and hopefully other sheep who read this article will have their eyes opened as well.
     
  4. TX1911fan

    TX1911fan Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,013
    I have a friend who has had his wife "converted" because of this crime.
     
  5. DogBonz

    DogBonz Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,068
    Location:
    NJ
    Yea...

    I know a few folks who have changed their tune after hearing or reading about this horrible crime. It is sad that it takes events like this for folks to come around. What is even sadder is those who still maintain that a firearm in one of their hands would not have at least leveled the playing field.
     
  6. elrod

    elrod Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2006
    Messages:
    697
    Location:
    Heart of the Heart of Dixie
    There are so many good, middle American people who live in Smallville, USA, who have never had a close brush with the reality that is brutal crime. In some ways it takes an especially heinous incident, such as the one in Connecticut to get their attention. Too many people have let the media tell them that firearms are not the way to go.:confused: It has been easier to let family members or employers steer them away from this option rather than take a course in gun use and safety, and purchase a defensive firearm. I pray we never see another crime this bloody, and I further pray that the one will be enough to get some otherwise defenseless homes armed safely. To have a positive editorial in a major northeastern newspaper is a large step in the right direction.;)
     
  7. Mr White

    Mr White Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,207
    Location:
    Central PA
    I'm skeptical of that editorial. He takes the tone that arming ones self against attackers is a very left-field idea that but that it may be necessary in the face of such horrible crimes. Its almost like he's putting the option of self defense out there as way to scare the masses into taking more action on the other options.

    Its like he's asking these questions with a preconceived idea of what the answer should be, but with the intent of stirring up the sheep to push for things like better 3 strikes laws, faster time-to-trial for offenders, better home alarm systems, more dogs or more cops.
     
  8. MikePGS

    MikePGS Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,348
    Location:
    Metro Detroit, Michigan
    Mr White, to me it almost sounded as if the person who wrote the article was being sardonic when he made those particular statements.
     
  9. Im283

    Im283 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Messages:
    1,054
    Location:
    Knox County, TN.
    I don't think words will change a true anti. Words might pull a fence sitter onto our side or even to the other but no one who is a true anti will not be swayed by mere words.

    The man who wrote the editorial to me does not sound like he is really sold on it. I agree with what Mr. White said.
     
  10. damien

    damien Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,212
    Location:
    Northern IL, USA
    I want the fence-sitters!

    If you are right, this is actually the most positive news I have heard in a while. The fact is, we can't and don't need to convince any of the true antis. 90% of the people out there are the fence sitters. The more fence sitters we pull in, the better. And I think we are succeeding in this regard. Changing the people who wear tinfoil hats has never been practical.
     
  11. IA_farmboy

    IA_farmboy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    264
    Location:
    Linn County, Iowa
    Move enough fence sitters to think that gun ownership should not be at the whim of the local sheriff, or state governor, and it would make those that think firearm restrictions are a good idea look as foolish in the future as the gun nuts do now to the mainstream media and general populace.

    I guy can dream, can't he?
     
  12. Mr White

    Mr White Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,207
    Location:
    Central PA
    Mike, do you mean that his sardonicisn was directed toward the 2nd Amendment, or toward his intended liberal Conneticut audience? If you were referring to the latter, then "Uh... yea, I'm going to have to go ahead and sort of disagree with you on that." TO me, it just doesn't seem that this guy is quite on our side.
     
  13. damien

    damien Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,212
    Location:
    Northern IL, USA
    I think the tone is of a person who has finally understood something inherant about the world, that some things are out of society's control (criminal intent on the part of other people) where he saw it is controllable before this crime (by passing gun control or actual criminal control laws). He doesn't like what he has found for sure. He is only endorsing gun ownership only as a practical matter because something exists that he thinks should not have to exist (serious crime). So his endorsement is half-hearted, but it is an endorsement and he lays out the logic for it flawlessly.

    Personally, I am happy for this editorial.
     
  14. Tim James

    Tim James Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    305
    Location:
    Florida
    You guys are complaining when the guy actually mentioned the Second Amendment in reference to opposing tyranny? Church bells should be tolling!

    The only complaint I can muster is to throw "disciplining children" and "stronger families" in his list of suggestions. (Okay, since he is part of the media-government complex, he can achieve the same thing by eliminating Great Society programs and bringing back the need for families. :))

    P.S. Please use a better thread title next time.
     
  15. Nolo

    Nolo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    Galveston, TX
    He definitely seems as if he's come from the other side.
    Hmmm...
    I liked it, but through the whole article, I wanted to scream "DUHHHHHH!!".
    That's just me though. I honestly don't understand how people can act as if objects are bad. Which is strange, because I understand perfectly why people personify objects. Maybe it's a weird form of personification. Like the opposite of what I do with my shotgun (give it a name, call it by it's name, sometimes talk to it, mostly just for kicks and giggles, but I suppose there's some real personification there). I think we've got politicians, just like in every war we've ever fought, uniting people by dividing everyone. The Kaiser rapes Belgians. Tojo murders Filipinos. Hitler massacres Jews. Communists are oppressive SOBs. Osama killed 3000 on 9/11. Saddam gassed the Kurds. Not that that isn't true, but it's still demonization, even when they deserve it.
     
  16. alucard0822

    alucard0822 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,229
    Location:
    Westminster, MD
    Overall, it seems like he is more cynical and possibly even sarcastic with the "antiquated system never to return" and "2a may be for real" comments. It is one of a few seemingly "exploratory" pro-2A editorials lately, possibly to gauge public reaction to it. A simple letter or e-mail to politely comment on the editorial, and to support the defensive use of firearms by citizens may help keep these articles and editorials around, and maybe even help encourage more. Either way it is much better than the NY Times and Baltimore Sun's standard "England is doing their part to stop gun violence, why aren't we?", and "The NRA has blood on it's hands again" type editorials that are openly anti-rights (both were published about a year or so ago) We should be on the forefront of polite and informed replies, as I am sure there will probably be a few "my ______ was a victim of gun violence, how many more people have to die before we do something" and we are also trying to win the hearts and minds of the fencesitters.
     
  17. Erebus

    Erebus Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,374
    Location:
    North Central MA
    It sure sounded like he was exploring a new line or direction of thinking to me. Like a door was opened and he is still trying to digest all the new concepts that he previously rejected or of which he was ignorantly unaware.
     
  18. jfh

    jfh Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,859
    Location:
    Maple Plain, MN
    never mind what OUR personal reactions are to this editorial--

    The fact is, this writer is writing for a cake-eating, east-coast educated audience. Most of them live lives that are undistressed, for the most part, and most of them have suburban liberal values.

    I can read--interpret--this editorial with any number of assumptions--but the bottom line is, it's a straightforward, unironic, unsardonic, revelation of Constitution Rights directed to an audience who probably doesn't think about the immediate impact of liberal truisms on their lives.

    Until something like this crime happened.

    We should be shouting hosannas from the Choir loft.

    So let's do it--use the contact to compliment him. Here's the contact info:

    Editorial Page Editor
    Keith Burris
    kburris@journalinquirer.com

    You can reach us by phone at (860) 646-0500 or 1-800-237-3606

    You can reach us by fax at (860) 646-9867




    BTW, those church bells are pealing, not tolling --:)

    Jim H.
     
  19. Nolo

    Nolo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    Galveston, TX
    He definitely seems as if he's come from the other side.
    Hmmm...
    I liked it, but through the whole article, I wanted to scream "DUHHHHHH!!".
    That's just me though. I honestly don't understand how people can act as if objects are bad. Which is strange, because I understand perfectly why people personify objects. Maybe it's a weird form of personification. Like the opposite of what I do with my shotgun (give it a name, call it by it's name, sometimes talk to it, mostly just for kicks and giggles, but I suppose there's some real personification there). I think we've got politicians, just like in every war we've ever fought, uniting people by dividing everyone. The Kaiser rapes Belgians. Tojo murders Filipinos. Hitler massacres Jews. Communists are oppressive SOBs. Osama killed 3000 on 9/11. Saddam gassed the Kurds. Not that that isn't true, but it's still demonization, even when they (the dictators) deserve it.
    Darn... it looked like it wasn't going to post for me, so I reposted. Sorry.
     
  20. bensdad

    bensdad Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,281
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Kudos to Mr. Burris. I agree that some of his comments are out-of-sync with OUR way of seeing things, but the article as a whole is leaps and bounds ahead of most editorials in the MSM.

    Yes, RKBA is a right, not a privilege earned via training. No, the 2A is not "newly relevant." It has always been so - and for more reasons than Mr. Burris articulates.

    Nevertheless, his willingness to address this issue in such a manner should be encouraged and commended. Baby steps. Baby steps.
     
  21. Werewolf

    Werewolf Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,192
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    A well written article that shows some people are capable of getting it if smacked up side the head with enough force.

    That said I just can't resist responding to this statement the author of the article made:
    Rehabilitation thru Reincarnation - removes the scum from society and cleanses the gene pool by preventing the animals from breeding. But then that's just a bit too hard core for our pampered, living in a pink skied, blue bunny, teddy bear world so guys like the author of that article might as well just get used to the continuation of abhorent acts by the monsters we not only breed but tend to nurture.
     
  22. garymc

    garymc Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    243
    Location:
    St. Louis
    How many other editorials has anyone read from this paper? Is this par for the course or a major change in direction? He could simply be trying to speak the language of his local readers with some of those questioning/uncertain statements. I find it amazing that there was not a single anti response on that page, especially considering that is the state that elects Christopher Dodd.
     
  23. Erebus

    Erebus Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,374
    Location:
    North Central MA
    I tend to agree with him. There will always be those that wil prey on others, there is no way to stop them from existing. You can only stop them from victimizing you and those around you.
     
  24. Rocketman56

    Rocketman56 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    82
    Location:
    Wally World HQ (NW Arkansas)
    excellent overall

    As has been mentioned, by several previous posters, the discussion of training was a bit troubling.

    Personally, as with ANY tool, training should be obtained by the individual who is using the tool. It should not be mandated, but a matter of personal responsibility which, unfortunately, our society of late has NOT fostered. (Which I consider one of the biggest issues that needs to be addressed.. I strive to install this in my children/grandchildren but society (aka, the local school system), doesn't help encourage.)

    THANKS!
    Steve
     
  25. jfh

    jfh Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,859
    Location:
    Maple Plain, MN
    Bump
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page