(AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, file)
Related Articles
This is the third in my series where I participate in Examiner.com's special "New Year's resolution" project.
Today's earlier post demonstrates for all to see how the so-called "mainstream press" exploits manipulative and deceptive anti-gun information. The folks I call "Authorized Journalists" are overwhelmingly anti-gun, and we routinely find supposedly "straight news" stories reflecting bias and ignorance--or see other important information ignored, if not suppressed.
Because their reach is so wide, it's important that we do what we can to let their readership know there is more information out there than they have been told. Thus today's suggested resolution:
I will write letters to the editor of my local paper to educate, to correct anti-gun misinformation and to bring their readership the truth.
First, of course, you'll need to read the paper's submission policy, to know where to send it to (email or "snail" mail), and also to know what their editorial guidelines are. For instance, if they specify a 250 word limit, your chances of seeing your points in print are reduced with each word going over that limit, and can increase by making your letter substantially shorter.
A couple other tips to increase the likelihood that yours will be among the letters they select:
Don't be insulting or tell them they probably won't print your letter because...it's fine to appeal to their sense of journalistic fairness--if that's the topic you choose--but otherwise, just stick to the points or corrections you wish to make.
Stay on topic--pick one or two points you wish to make and don't wander from them. The more topics you throw in, the more confusing and less powerful and persuasive your letter will be.
Be sure of your facts. That means relying on an unsourced chain email about SB 2099 or Fred Maslack of Vermont's "new bill" does not do "the cause" any good, and in fact, hurts your credibility. Also, providing attribution is the proper thing to do.
Don't overwhelm them. That means wait a month or so before sending your next submission.
Going through these simple steps should produce a credible and persuasive letter, and it will help make you a more knowledgeable and effective advocate. That's a "win" in and of itself. If you look at it that way, seeing your letter in print is icing on the cake.
Comments
Guns NEED to be banned; there's no use for them. Do you really need an assault rifle for a bear or deer? If we were to just limit guns to say handguns, that's all that's needed for a robber. Why do you need your guns? they cause more suffering than use.
Anthony,
Why do we need so many TV channels, radio stations, or newspapers? Ask me, and I will tell you what you need to know.
Can't get in contact with me? Don't worry, you already have it all figured out and do not need any more information.
Oh, and Anthony, don't bother replying. When you have decided that no one is entitled to their rights, except for what you will allow in your superior wisdom, then I really do not care to see that you have exercised your rights.
Cars need to be banned; there's no use for them. Why do you need a 100 HP carbon dioxide spewing planet killing machine to get to work. Take the train or the subway. If we were to limit all cars to 10 HP engines and 20 miles per hour we'd all be safer and get good gas mileage. That's all that's needed to get to and from the store. If you need to go further you can use public transportation. Why do you need your cars? They just cause Global Warming.
Hey if banning cars gets it done than sure. I mean trains work well, why not?
Dear Ed, I will answer you. There is no sense in owning guns, they are not defensive weaponry: pepper spray, tasers, a knife even. Guns are offensive weaponry, there's no need for them in our country; it isn't a right. There is a common misconception that the second amendment was created for guns but it is not so. The second amendment was to defend this young nation against the inevitable British attack. It was a defense mechanism to form militias, and that was 300 years ago. The second amendment is outdated and needs to be scrapped.
Good one, man--pretend to be an anti and then come up with the looniest proposals imaginable to make them look insane.
Brilliant.
I agree, use writing to help them understand. If we want freedom we have to exercise it...
Anthony,
Sooooo. . .
When the Second Amendment directly sez, ". . the right to keep and bear arms. .", you're going to interpret that to mean, what? Cutlasses? Flintlocks? Feet? Bare feet?
And as for guns being "offensive", mine are well-trained, and are nothing but polite to me. I take care of them, train them, train with them, and clean them. Seriously, guns are but a tool, and are not "offensive" or "defensive" in themselves. Their use is all in the hands of the person weilding them. Is a hammer and a nail "offensive" or "defensive"? Actually, again, neither. Depends on if the person doing the hammering is using the nail to build a house, hang a picture, OR, assault a victim. Is it the fault of the gun, hammer or nail? Or of the person who picks each of them up?
I could go on about the several MILLION uses of a gun ANNUALLY to defend people against robbery, assault, murder or rape. These are well documented. But you probably won't listen.
B Woodman, there are better choices than guns. Take karate, Judo, get pepper spray, tasers, knives. Anything is better than guns, and when we ban them criminals using will go down too. At the VERY least we should limit them. I mean we can all agree assault rifles and automatics aren't needed right? Can't we agree anything beyond a shot gun for hunting is excessive? How about ammunition and making it tough to buy and keep track of who is buying them? These little things and cut down on crime, and yet you may keep some guns. There I am capable of compromise something conservatives will never learn.
You're killing me! This is comedy gold!
I've never seen anyone do a better impersonation of an idiot anti-gunner who doesn't have a clue. You are great at this kind of satire. Kudos!
anthony.so do cars ban them
Can we get this back on the topic of letters to the editor please?
Actually, David, many of the letters in the Miami Herald look like the ones here. Maybe they're practiceing?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!