As reported here Saturday, educational foundation Ceasefire Oregon failed to draw a significant crowd to its afternoon downtown Eugene rally.
Now verified by area KVAL NEWS and this Examiner, 20 or so attendees were present at the rally, with four of those counted as members of the media. This reporter was later reminded through article feedback, that nine pro-gun rights advocates were also present at the rally.
This reporter counted two! But that’s not the point of this posting.
The point being that pro-gun activist were not represented in the article, and felt more than a bit slighted.
Several of them, including Alex W. Pape of Cabin Creek Farms exercised their rightful access to freedom of speech through the written word, by reprimanded this Examiner for not including their movement in the Ceasefire Oregon article.
Although the Ceasefire Oregon article was not their story, this Examiner believes that the pro-gun contingency (as outspoken as they are) should have their say.
As noted by this Examiner, gun rights and proposed heightened gun control in Oregon is a very heated issue. The same holds true on a national level. Millions of Americans love their guns! They hold their freedom of choice even closer to their hearts, and passionately defend the right to collect and bear arms despite current events, public opinion and outcry.
While these gun owners may be moved (privately) to tears by heinous events such as the Sandy Hook School Shooting, many don’t condone what they consider to be a reactionary proposed increase in federal and state gun control legislation.
Many pro-gun advocates believe that they hold the right to purchase and use any weapon of their choice regardless of sense and sensibility. The issue to most is one of freedom of choice as well as limitation of the power of federal government within the confines of the Constitution.
Some will point to Nazi Germany, Stalin, or early American history to justify their need to arm to the teeth. To them, arming “we the people” keeps government in check.
Other’s simply like to blow things up. Destroy old cars and trucks, and kill an animal from time to time. To these folks the countryside is an open playground that’s not country without a gun or 12.
Case in point: Despite the rather dismal public turn out at the Eugene Ceasefire Oregon rally, the reaction to, as well as the number of folks reading the Saturday article demonstrates a not so quite storm brewing behind proposed heightened state and federal gun control.
The power of the internet and social media:
Visualize a thousand or so rally attendees fired up on double espressos. Throw in a couple of shaved headed, riffle toting, flag waving participants. Toss in an endless, baseless argument or two. The image portrayed fails to capture the extent of a sometimes extreme and often baseless debate boiling in Oregon over 'possible' state gun control measures.
The people are not happy. And this most eagerly displayed unhappiness is not exclusive to rural Oregon. What is discribed here is an article conversation thread as encountered by this Examiner on the issue of gun ownership rights in America.
To say the issue is a heated one, is a gross understatement!
Alex W. Pape of Cabin Creek Farms believes that reporting should be non-bias. Furthermore all sides of an issue should be given the opportunity to be read. This Examiner agrees.
However, Alex failed to acknowledge that the Ceasefire Oregon rally story wasn’t written about pro-gun advocacy. It was a report penned in response to “Ceasefire Eugene.”
Mr. Pape was offered the opportunity to respond to the article through commenting. He did so, and was acknowledged. He was in-fact given his due.
Brent Blair of Sandy Oregon likes to beat around the bush. He doesn’t have a strong argument for the ownership of assault style, high capacity magazines, and semiautomatic rifles. He instead clogs the comment thread with senseless jabs at semantics, inferring that the Examiner is ignorant of gun type and indicated use. Mr. Blair is unaware of the fact that this Examiner is a long past member of the N.R.A., and is familiar with all categories of bolt and semiautomatic series riffles.
Marc L. of Vancouver is a pro-gun rights advocate that fails to present a compelling reason to continue the manufacture and distribute of high powered, high capacity, semiautomatic assault style riffles. He’s another advocate that prefers to squabble over the difference between a magazine and a load clip, while failing to support his position.
Note: It’s estimated that no fewer than 320,000,000 guns are held by civilians in the United States of America. In 2009(last year recorded) 30,000+ were killed by hand guns, the majority by their own hand.
In closing: Until pro-gun advocates collectively step up to the podium and produce a viable argument as to not mandating universal background checks; criminal and mental health. Limiting children’s access to firearms; restricting the admittance of firearms to schools and school zones, outside of law enforcement. And, agreeing to the registration and or the restriction of a certain class of weapons, the United States of America will remain locked in a never-ending debate.
Due to a diverse, regionally influenced public perception and consequent opinion, there are no winners in the gun control debate.
Most law enforcement officials, politicians and reporters stay clear of the issue. It’s an increasingly unpopular one with no easy answers. It’s a philosophically fired moral conundrum, punctuated by Constitutional undertones. A debate that has raged for hundreds of years has hit the wall of civilized consideration on the heels of the Sandy Hook School massacre. For many, now is the time to limit public access to high capacity handheld weapons of destruction through legislation proposed by president Barack Obama and V.P. Joe Biden. Others call for individual accountability to keep in check the killers that roam society, as state and federal legislators contemplate heightened gun control.