The Record

[cameroneod]

I sent this email to The Record.

Hello,
I recently sent in a reply to an article you had posted on the subject of assault weapons. The article can be found at http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=8198871&BRD=1170&PAG=461&dept_id=7021&rfi=8
My reply was clear, concise, and honest. It did however differ from the opinion of the author. With such an important issue, I find it extremely important that both sides be heard. Is it the standard policy of The Record that only opinions of agreement be voiced? Is it so hard to believe that someone who owns firearms, and believes the Second Ammendment to be an individual right, would be able do give a valid, educated opinion on the subject?
Please reconsider you choice not to include my response on your webpage. People need to hear both sides of the story.

Sincerely,
cameroneod

I want to see my reply posted. It wasnt rude at all. Just very pro-gun, and it made the author look pretty rediculous.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Assault weapons have but one purpose - to serve as weapons of mass destruction.
The more-sophisticated weapons are engineered to kill as many possible people as possible in as short a period time as possible while subjecting the shooter to the least-possible amount of exposure.

Any newspaper that would waste ink and paper on such drivel isn't likely to have any use for independent, intelligent thought.

 

[cameroneod]

I got a reply

Dear XXXXXXX:
There has been no decision to reject your comment at this time.
We are behind in processing our reader mail, but will process it early
this week.
Sincerely,
The Record



Maybe they will post it.