Thernlund said:
I did the search you suggested and found what I think you wanted me to find (a letter to the ATF from your attorney, currently posted on Free Republic. My apologies, but just I don't believe it. At best I think it may be a marketing tactic for your book. At worst, full blown paranoia. I'll concede that it's possible. But not plausible. Without proof of such thing I cannot bring myself to buy the story. Other more high-profile authors such as Clancy (mentioned) have written content much more deserving of gov't scrutiny, and yet only you get harassed? I'm sorry. I can't buy that without more evidence.
Finally, I said it before and I cannot apologize for it. I view your book as somewhat damaging to the gun culture in America. It suggests that these people are typical gun people. It suggests that American gun owners are a murderous lot that will flip at a moments notice and begin gunning down entire families in their front yards if they feel at all wronged. It paints us as a vengeful bunch that will mow over everyone to get what we want.
Now keep in mind, I take little issue with the gov't reading your book. I fully suspect that UC, for the most part, didn't really stick out among the multitude of similar content that is published all the time. No, I don't think UC has damaged us in the eyes of the gov't at all. I doubt they even blinked. What concerns me is that UC damages us to the general public. You're book gets around, and I suspect it has a great deal of readership beyond gun people. It worries me that these non-gun people may read UC and get the idea that Bowman and Caswell as typical of gun people. The book content by itself is just a story. But it is given real-world weight by you suggesting in your introduction that this is a very close proximity. Nobody ever thought that Stephen King was suggesting that we actually make criminals run for their lives in his short story "The Running Man". But then Stephen King didn't write an introduction implying it was the real deal or these were typical people, eh?
"It suggests that American gun owners are a murderous lot that will flip at a moments notice and begin gunning down entire families in their front yards if they feel at all wronged."
I would like to chime in on this and provide a defense, if I may. Thernlund, you suggest that Mr. Ross's book paints American gun owners as a murderous lot (as reference by the above excerpt). In Mr. Ross's story, a government LEO squad opens up on the house of a friend of the main character (who is not home). Bowman must protect himself against an armed bunch of "jackbooted thugs," with, IIRC, a .22RF handgun. If you disdain gun owners as a "murderous lot," I have to wonder; is it OK with you if government agents, clad in black kevlar and armed with fully auto subguns, go smashing into peoples' homes like that?
The ATF has been known for these types of things. In an early incident, a man named (IIRC) Ken Ballew was home showering. ATF agents came busting into his home. As I recall, they entered through a door that was unused, and had household items blocking it. His wife (??IIRC) started screaming, as they looked to her like vagrants or hippies; Ballew, exiting from a shower, wet, naked, grabbed the first thing he could to defend his wife, and that turned out to be an antque revolver. The dynamic entry team was better armed, and Ballew was permanently incapacitated.
Here, the ATF agents were after him because he was reputed to have a hand grenade.
He did.
It was mounted on a wood base, had a #1 card glued on it, and the base said "complaint department."
It was a dummy grenade.
In another ATF action, a house was trashed, agents apparantly ordered pizaa while there, and one ATF agent deliberatly stomped a pet cat to death.
At Ruby Ridge, other federal agents shot a family dog, shot a forteen year old boy in the back, who was returning fire after mysterious gunman had slaughtered his pet dog, and a sharpshooter put a bullet through Mrs. Weaver who was holding a baby standing behind a door.
At Waco, the ATF initiated an assault on a religious commune at a front door after firing through the door, engaged in a protracted gunfight, shot a few of their own agents in the butt, and retreated after running low on ammunition. Then the F.B.I. moved in, and while their hostage rescue team managed to gain Koresh's trust, their armed squads defeated the purpose by bulldozing cars, recent graves of the Davidian's dead, and fired into the building rom helicopters, and inserted dangerous highly flammable gas using tanks. There is also a controversial matter of delta team riflemen shooting into the burning compound building, preventing the Davidians from escaping through holes made by the tanks, a controversial matter seemingly, but supported by infrared videotape which shows apparant muzzleblasts.
These incidents spawned to some degree the militia movement that grew during the 1990s, when Clinton stuffed a ridiculous, ineffectual "assault weapon ban" down our throats.
Now, since you regard Ross's characters as "murderous," I wonder what adjective you would apply to the United States Government's actions as noted above? Is this the kind of law enforcement you want in America?
It is in my mind the kind of things I associated with the German
Einsatzgruppen, the
Geheimstaatz Polizei, the
Waffen Shutzstaffel and other Nazi military/police groups operating from 1933-45 in europe.
"Other more high-profile authors such as Clancy (mentioned) have written content much more deserving of gov't scrutiny ... " Clancy's books to the best of my recollesction never took so negative a tone in regard to Federal agencies. Clancy's first book,
The Hunt for Red October, however, did draw government attention because he did such a thorough job of researching it the government thought he might have been privy too, and release some, classified information on submarines and other related high tech matters. That turned out not to be the case; Clancy had simply used material you get from
Jane's or other public sources. The govt. was unaware that it had released this information -- then investigated Clancy for using it in a bestseller novel.
"No, I don't think UC has damaged us in the eyes of the gov't at all. I doubt they even blinked. What concerns me is that UC damages us to the general public. You're book gets around, and I suspect it has a great deal of readership beyond gun people. It worries me that these non-gun people may read UC and get the idea that Bowman and Caswell as typical of gun people."
There are elements in the public who will always blindly follow the government belle wether no matter what. They will prattle on on how the govt. must protect the people, how health care is a right that govt. must fix, and on and on and they will never see the light. They will look on Ruby Ridge and Waco as unfortunate aberrations, and, well, those mean crazy people with guns, they "deserved it." I don't think many of these people will ever be reached.
But some can, and it is imperative to do so.
When King George's reign over America, over two hundred years ago, became destructive to our liberties, we resisted. Only maybe one third of the colonists sympathized with the cause, but a few per cent of those showed up with guns and fought, but we did so, and after a long struggle against the British and then ourselves, we managed to establish the Constitution and Bill of Rights as a legal backbone to this country.
They hoped that throughout adherence to this, our rights and our freedoms would be protected.
That will no longer remain true if the government continues to ignore and to trash these rights.
While you disdain Mr. Ross's characters for their violence .... what do you say about what
MOTIVATED their violence -- a government gone amuck, ignoring long cherished rights? Meddling in every aspect of American life? Shooting forteen years olds in the back??
Today our rights continue to be eroded, by McCain - Feingold as well as Supreme Court decisions which greatly expand the concept of eminent domain. While we must continuously be aware of these transgressions, and press for reformation through the use of the ballot box and even the jury box, are we supposed to have all become such sheeple that we will never reach for the cartridge box even when the absolute need for it has been made blatantly obvious in the hearts and minds of all men?
When do we fight? If ever?
"None are more hopelsessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." ~~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
"Americans used to rorar like lions for liberty, now we bleat like sheep for security." ~~ Norman Vincent Peale.
"The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists."~~ John Hay (1872)
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." ~~Edward R. Murrow.
"Justice will be served until those who are unaffected will be as outraged as those who are." ~~ Benjamin Franklin.
