Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.

 

NRA is defending the Second Amendment rights of terrorists

To The Daily Sun,

On Nov. 27, 12 individuals were gunned down at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs. On Dec. 2, 36 were gunned down at the Department Of Public Health in San Bernardino (the second mass shooting of the day). They became the 351st and 353rd mass shootings in the United States this calendar year.

While I may not be politically correct, I consider these shootings as acts of terror, in that they strike fear into the hearts and minds of individuals, communities, and the nation.

I found it very disconcerting that a contributor to this forum rationalized the actions of the Planned Parenthood shooter and blamed the victims. Apparently the writer is of the belief that the killer, reacting on perceived deeds of horror, felt he was justified in what he did. This callous and convoluted mindset, lacking in empathy for the suffering of others, has become all too prevalent within the leadership of the NRA. After Sandy Hook, the NRA blamed the school for its no weapons policy that put children's lives at risk and called on schools to arm themselves — the NRA by implication blames the massacre at Sandy Hook on school officials for not having armed guards.

When nine were killed at a Charleston church, NRA board member, Charles Cotton, blamed the pastor, who was killed, for the deaths of his eight congregants. After a man killed nine people at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, another NRA board member, Ted Nugent, claimed that unarmed victims of mass shootings are "losers." The notion that victims bear the responsibility of preventing these terrorist acts has long lurked in the NRA consciousness. The NRA implies that it is the responsibility of mass shooting victims to stop their would-be killer as opposed to society's responsibility to stop would-be killers from accessing weapons that make mass murder possible. Must victims of mass shooting be victimized twice?

I agree with the writer who expressed concern that the rise of terrorism will be a major focus of the 2016 election. He should take solace in the fact that the NRA, in defending terrorist's Second Amendment rights, will ensure their capabilities to purchase automatic weapons, assault rifles and ammunition to carry out  these attacks. Those committed to carrying out terrorist attacks have an ally in the NRA.

The NRA has also contrived a clever marketing ploy. As pitchman for the gun industry, they tell us, the "good guys," to arm ourselves against the "bad guys," while this same industry manufactures and distributes weapons to the "bad guys." The cycle continues with more and more guns being needed to protect us from the "bad guys" and the only ones profiting from this scam is the industry. A mass shooting is good for sales, but if sales should drop off, the NRA will manufacture a bogus article claiming the government is coming for you guns — always good for boosting revenues.

Robert Miller

Alton

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 172

NRA is defending the Second Amendment rights of terrorists

To The Daily Sun,

On Nov. 27, 12 individuals were gunned down at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs. On Dec. 2, 36 were gunned down at the Department Of Public Health in San Bernardino (the second mass shooting of the day). They became the 351st and 353rd mass shootings in the United States this calendar year.

While I may not be politically correct, I consider these shootings as acts of terror, in that they strike fear into the hearts and minds of individuals, communities, and the nation.

I found it very disconcerting that a contributor to this forum rationalized the actions of the Planned Parenthood shooter and blamed the victims. Apparently the writer is of the belief that the killer, reacting on perceived deeds of horror, felt he was justified in what he did. This callous and convoluted mindset, lacking in empathy for the suffering of others, has become all too prevalent within the leadership of the NRA. After Sandy Hook, the NRA blamed the school for its no weapons policy that put children's lives at risk and called on schools to arm themselves — the NRA by implication blames the massacre at Sandy Hook on school officials for not having armed guards.

When nine were killed at a Charleston church, NRA board member, Charles Cotton, blamed the pastor, who was killed, for the deaths of his eight congregants. After a man killed nine people at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, another NRA board member, Ted Nugent, claimed that unarmed victims of mass shootings are "losers." The notion that victims bear the responsibility of preventing these terrorist acts has long lurked in the NRA consciousness. The NRA implies that it is the responsibility of mass shooting victims to stop their would-be killer as opposed to society's responsibility to stop would-be killers from accessing weapons that make mass murder possible. Must victims of mass shooting be victimized twice?

I agree with the writer who expressed concern that the rise of terrorism will be a major focus of the 2016 election. He should take solace in the fact that the NRA, in defending terrorist's Second Amendment rights, will ensure their capabilities to purchase automatic weapons, assault rifles and ammunition to carry out  these attacks. Those committed to carrying out terrorist attacks have an ally in the NRA.

The NRA has also contrived a clever marketing ploy. As pitchman for the gun industry, they tell us, the "good guys," to arm ourselves against the "bad guys," while this same industry manufactures and distributes weapons to the "bad guys." The cycle continues with more and more guns being needed to protect us from the "bad guys" and the only ones profiting from this scam is the industry. A mass shooting is good for sales, but if sales should drop off, the NRA will manufacture a bogus article claiming the government is coming for you guns — always good for boosting revenues.

Robert Miller

Alton

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 200