Please pick my opinion to the Sun paper apart

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • on_the_rox

    Ultimate Member
    Oct 16, 2009
    1,696
    Whiteford, MD
    I would like to submit the follow in response to an editorial printed by the editor of the Sun today. Please review it and let me know if I am on the right track and if it needs help. Thanks.

    Marylander’s deserve much more than a vote.

    I would like to respond to the February 17th Our View: President Obama’s State of the Union plea for Congress to act on gun control strikes a chord with most Americans editorial in the Baltimore Sun. The opinion focused on supporting President Obama’s assertion during his state of the union address that the recent victims of violence in Arizona, Connecticut, and Chicago needed to have their vote heard. The opinion also went on to denounce the NRA, republicans, and certain democrats for opposing portions of Obama’s recently proposed legislation looking to ban many semi-automatic firearms and certain magazines. The opinion ends with the following, “On this devisive issue, all of us deserve a vote.”

    I believe the recent tragedies have struck a chord with most Americans. I believe most Americans would like to see Congress and their local state governments enact some common sense legislation that would make real differences in keeping American families safer. It seems that there has been a jump on a national and state level to legislate gun control. This same reaction was carried out with the result being the now expired Federal Assault Weapons ban of 1994. Studies were conducted about the weapons ban and it's effectivness, but the reality was it had no real effect on the majority of violent crime as criminals do not typically use the firearms that were banned to commit crimes. In fact the majority of criminals prefer easily concealable pistols, many of which are stolen. Focusing on firearms instead of the real solutions allows criminals to continue to ply their trade. Most Americans realize it is futile to go down this same road again, especially when there are better solutions out there.

    The majority of Americans are smart enough to realize where the problems lie. Although it gets reported that the NRA, republicans, and some democrats that are intimidated by the NRA are the ones pushing opposition to this proposed legislation, the reality is the majority of Americans do not want to see limitations on law abiding firearms owners but would like to see real solutions. These same Americans are not having their “votes” heard either because they are being drowned out by the liberal based media which chooses to use its voice to skew what is reported and how events are portrayed.

    Conversely, In a recent independent poll in Maryland the people have spoken and should be heard. This independent poll ( http://www.marylandshallissue.org/share/Toplines-Maryland Statewide-Feb2013.pdf) was conducted statewide and queried a diverse cross-section of likely registered voters. Although most of those polled were democrats (53%), did not own/have guns in the home (59%), and were from the metropolitan regions of the state (73%), the majority seemed to come to the same conclusions regarding solutions to the violence in Maryland. Nearly all (96%) felt they have a right to protect themselves and their families from a criminal act, with an overwhelming majority (83%) believing it ok to use a firearm to accomplish this. The majority (50% to 39%) do not believe the government should limit the firearms available for self-defense should be limited to those used for hunting. These responses completely coincide with the facts reported by the FBI regarding crime statistics (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20) which showed that the weapons most politicians are wanting to ban are not causing the majority of Maryland’s or America’s crime.

    With regards to what should be done the poll was clear. In a response asking about solutions to preventing mass murders, a small fraction (20%) favored banning semi-automatic weapons while a majority (62%) thought that strengthening mental health records with regards to obtaining firearms would be more effective. Strengthening mental health reporting could be accomplished by several proposed bills in Maryland’s legislature including HB0810 which would require better communication on mental health concerns. A majority (55% to 37%) favored placing armed resource officers in schools to protect our children. Coincidently there is a bill before the Maryland state Senate (SB0807) that would do just that, yet most politicians are not focused on that. Further respondents overwhelmingly agree (88%) that repeat violent offenders that use firearms in commission of a crime should in fact be required to serve their entire sentences. In my opinion this solution of focusing on keeping repeat offenders off the street would be the biggest solution to actually reducing the occurences of violent crimes. Again there are several bills pending that could address this particular issue including SB0786.

    So I say the majority of Marylanders and Americans are very smart. They can see through all the politics and can see where the real changes need to happen. Marylanders have responded and have shown that they believe in concrete solutions to the states problems, not in politician’s desires to limit law abiding citizens while side stepping the real problems (criminals, no current protection for school children, and reporting issues regarding mental health). So yes, in the end I have to agree with one part of the original opinion. Marylanders do deserve to be heard, and their views do deserve to be represented by their elected politicians. So in the end we ALL deserve our vote to be heard!
     
    Last edited:

    HKB

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 14, 2007
    2,060
    Finksburg, MD
    There are many studies regarding this previous ban and its effectiveness, but the reality is it had no real effect on the majority of violent crime as criminals do not typically use the firearms that were banned to commit crimes

    May want reword this statement, makes it sound like the gun ban worked.
     

    cmb

    Active Member
    Dec 28, 2012
    502
    Conowingo MD
    May want reword this statement, makes it sound like the gun ban worked.

    I've read the statement you comment about. It tells me "studies were made about the weapons ban and it's effectivness" and the reality is there was NO effect on violent crimes commited by CRIMINALS.In short,as a wise man said just a few days ago,"we have a wolf problem,you don't solve a wolf problem by creating more SHEEP"!
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    I tried to read this like I had no time, and I came way thinking that you support gun control .....

    You must state your position in the first paragraph and defend it by the second.. its not fair but that's how it is. I do not mean to be harsh. I think you make good points and I want them to be read.

    You also appear to be apologizing for apposing the prevailing view.. do not do that.

    Say while I understand the reaction I think it is short sided ,,,, but not till paragraph 3. Reverse it your position first then discuss why you disagree with theirs, etc..

    You must understand that as a rule if you do not hook your reader in the first 2 or 3 sentences you are never going to be heard.

    You can blame attention span, or you could blame the fact that more media is created in a single day than was read in a lifetime in the founders time, but either way you must live with the fact.

    Par 1 I think that
    Par 2 this is why
    Par 3 this is why additional ( optional)
    Par 3 or 4 I appose ...
    Par 4 or 5. I still think that with strong close.


    Hope this helps you be heard.
     

    f1racecar

    Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 11, 2011
    224
    Havre de Grace
    Might work better if you shorten it some. The antis get pages to support their opinion, but us pro gunners must be short and sweat.

    :thumbsup:
     

    Kimerazor

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 14, 2011
    1,323
    "FEE state"
    Brooklyn is correct. You need to grab the reader and support your position by bringing the reader closer.

    Here is a format to follow, typically 4 paragraphs, but it can be more.

    A = Attention
    I = Interest
    D = Desire
    A = Action

    Get the reader's attention...create interest, and a desire to move to action.

    Good luck.
     

    HKB

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 14, 2007
    2,060
    Finksburg, MD
    I've read the statement you comment about. It tells me "studies were made about the weapons ban and it's effectivness" and the reality is there was NO effect on violent crimes commited by CRIMINALS.In short,as a wise man said just a few days ago,"we have a wolf problem,you don't solve a wolf problem by creating more SHEEP"!

    as criminals do not typically use the firearms that were banned to commit crimes
    Not trying to nit pick, as I read this I take it as banned firearms were not used because they were banned. Maybe replace it with something like:
    "Stats show that the 1994 AWB had no effect on crime reduction" or something to that effect. JMO
     

    Tungsten

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 1, 2012
    7,293
    Elkridge, Leftistan
    2nd paragraph
    "Studies were conducted about the weapons ban and it's effectivness, "
    its, not it's

    4th paragraph
    "The majority (50% to 39%) do not believe the government should limit the firearms available for self-defense should be limited to those used for hunting. "

    rewrite. maybe
    The majority (50% to 39%) do not believe the government should limit the firearms available for self-defense, nor limit them to those used for hunting.
     

    Ozzy

    Active Member
    Jan 20, 2013
    113
    Md
    Sounds good but you may have to shorten it a little its hard to hold the antis attention this long.
     

    Bravo

    Bravo
    Feb 18, 2013
    349
    Howard County
    Suggestions

    Due to short attention spans,mine included, I would suggest more brevity in your letter. People are most concerned about themselves, not what happens to others.

    Perhaps you could start with some true but shocking crime statistics (these affect everyone), like the rape and home invasion statistics, mention that people will be taxed for exercising a constitutional right (a dangerous precedent) , the failure of the spent casing program- zero convictions, because law abiding folks don't commit crime, something in that vein.

    Short with mild repetition,but not too repetitive. Many folks who don't own guns are dismayed that the constitution is being trashed, that affects everyone.

    Thanks for your efforts.....Bravo
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,553
    Messages
    7,286,158
    Members
    33,476
    Latest member
    Spb5205

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom