Second Amendment Supporter Needs Help!

nralife

New member
Second Amendment Supporter needs help


The following was posted at the Sixgunner Message Board concerning a "Morning Call" column regarding the Bethlehem,PA, MMMarch organizer. Read the post from Gus,then read Paul Carpenter's article, and then start writing to the Editor.


Gus
Heads will roll for telling the truth
Fri Oct 6 20:33:08 2000


Paul Carpenter, the conservative columnist at the Morning Call newspaper, has come under fire from the entire editorial staff at the paper and is being threatened
with termination.

What caused this? In today's edition of the Morning Call Mr. Carpenter told the truth about the leader of the Million Mom March. As it turns out she was arrested for
DWI, public drunkeness, and assorted vehicle violations four years ago.

The Million Moms have flooded the Morning Call with e-mails calling for his termination. If we want to keep the only media friend we have in the Lehigh Valley, you must write a quick note saying how much you enjoyed reading Carpenter's column today, how much you admire him for reporting the truth, and the only reason you get the Call is to read his
column.

Send your e-mails to letters robin.miller@mcall.com with a CC: to
paul.carpenter@mcall.com

This cannot wait until tomorrow. You must do it NOW. Mr. Carpenter's job is on the line.

His column is below:

Headline: Gun debate rallies are full of surprises
Date: 10/06/00


Not everything turns out the way it is planned.

This week's First Monday 2000 rally in Bethlehem, we were told in advance, was not for gun control. "It's just antiviolence," rally organizer Helen Ruch told me.

That's not the way it turned out; the rally was largely devoted to antigun rhetoric on signs and in speeches.

Ruch had hoped 1,500 would join her, but 70 showed up to march across Bethlehem's Fahy Bridge. That dwindled to 40 for her postmarch rally at Moravian College.

An anti-antigun turnout, on the other hand, surprised even the most ardent National Rifle Association members. More than 1,000 foes of gun control lined one side of Fahy Bridge as Ruch's 70 demonstrators marched across on the other side, then more than 2,000 showed up at
Bethlehem's Rose Garden for a rally to support the Second Amendment.

Another surprise, given the passions on both sides, was that nearly all these people were very polite.

At Moravian, following some truly dreadful music, Ruch hailed her "rally to attempt to end gun
violence." She said there are conflicting numbers about how many people are killed by guns, but "one victim a day is too many....Our children do not feel safe and that's not fair."

Then began the awfullest music you can imagine, so I bailed out to go see how the other rally was doing.

The pro-gun rally focused almost entirely on why gun control is bad. It was argued that crime increased after cities like New York, Washington and Los Angeles imposed
severe restrictions on citizens carrying guns, giving criminals free rein. Other arguments were that things like gun locks and waiting periods similarly leave people defenseless.

All that may be true, but it seems to me that if you have 2,000 zealots in one spot, you should not waste time trying to convince them of what they already intractably believe.

Instead, tell them how to gain political support, pool resources or persuade those not yet in your camp, including news media people, many of whom unabashedly support
those who seek to dilute the Bill of Rights.

My sentiments have long been aligned against gun control, mainly because it abrogates part of the Bill of Rights, but also because much of the impetus comes from hysteria.

Last year, I questioned the hysteria over gun violence in schools while there was far less outcry over violence caused by drunks. This week, figures supplied by Mothers
Against Drunk Driving said drunken drivers killed 15,935 in 1998. Handgun Control, a Washington group that pushes gun
control, said there were 12,102 homicides by firearms in 1998.

Neither figure is heartening, but the drunks are outdoing the gunslingers when it comes to deadly violence.

And that brings us back to Ruch and a final surprise.

Noting her view that it's not fair for children to feel unsafe because of guns, I asked her Thursday if
she thinks it's also unfair that they feel unsafe because of the far more serious dangers from drunken drivers.

"What does that have to do with anything?" she replied.

I told her it has to do with her drunken driving charge.

"I have no comment," she said.

That's OK, because Lehigh County Court records commented plenty.

They say Ruch was charged with public drunkenness (later dropped), driving under the influence, and proper "emerging onto roadway" in 1996. "Driver was given sobriety
tests of balance and walking and failed all tests. Effects of alcohol were extreme," said an Allentown police report. The report said her breath test registered 0.162.

The records say that in 1997, Ruch agreed to enter the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition program. Typically, when ARD is successfully completed, DUI records can
be expunged.

In any event, it seems to me that if those marching across Fahy Bridge genuinely want to curb deadly violence, they can start by demanding tougher sanctions for drunken drivers.


Contact Paul Carpenter
610-820-6176
paul.carpenter@mcall.com



------------------

NRA Joe's Second Amendment Discussion Forum

http://Second.Amendment.Homepage.com

[This message has been edited by nralife (edited October 07, 2000).]
 
Sent-- and may it do some good.
All of us need to stand up and protest this... every little tyranny allowed to pass unchallenged nips away at all our liberties.
 
Dear Robin Miller:

I read Paul Carpenter's column "Gun debate rallies are full of surprises" Dated 10/06/00. I've also learned that there are some people that took offense to this column and are trying to get Mr. Carpenter fired. Why? For telling the truth? I have one question, how many liberal writers have been fired for presenting their views when conservatives call to protest what they have written? Not many I'll warrant. Mr. Carpenter's column's are a light of truth among the propaganda being put out by most writers of today. Will you let a small spark of freedom be extinguished because a few malcontents can't stand the light of the truth? Or is it perhaps that the editorial staff are the ones that can't face the truth? In either case, it is the reporters job to bring to light these facts. Is it not? I personally would be sad to see Mr. Carpenter’s column removed.

Thanks


------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!

[This message has been edited by bookkie (edited October 07, 2000).]
 
I'm getting undeliverable as addressed to both Robin and Mr. Carpenter.... Will keep trying.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
Here's mine...
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Mr. Miller...

I understand that Mr. Carpenters words have come under attack, and I wanted to submit my support for him.

I feel that the Message Ms. Ruch was stating needs to be heard as much as the statements Mr. Carpenter has made to allow the public to understand the issue of Safety is not solely a "Firearms" issue.

It seems the supporters for Ms. Ruch want to dismiss the 1st Amendment as quickly as they do the 2nd. If his facts are documented, and supported, and no liabel is established, he should have his say as well. A call for his immediate termination is simply the liberal's approach to crying "Foul".

Maybe Mr. Carpenter should have also called for a ban on automobiles. Using the same measurement of reason and application of logic that Ms. Ruch's supporters do...

Guns kill people, Guns should be banned.

Mr. Carpenter points out that Drunk Drivers kill MORE people, Drunk Drivers should be banned.

More importantly...
Of course we know those guns have a mind of their own, and just have a bad habit of jumping up, and going off all by themselves, much as cars have the same habit of driving down the road while unattended, and injuring or killing our citizens.

Sir, I submit to you it is not about guns, or cars, or anything else, it is about Rights. Violence in our country, and the use of guns to commit that violence will not simply go away by removing guns, anymore than Cocaine has been eliminated as a result of our "War on Drugs".

If a person is intent on performing an illegal act, and causes harm or death to someone else in the course of that act, hold them responsible, and not the object they used, or we will soon be without the use of the automobile because of a few "bad apples" who choose to drive while intoxicated.

Thank You!
[/quote]

[This message has been edited by jaydee (edited October 07, 2000).]
 
Back
Top