Another reporter calls for the banning of weapons of those who didn’t do the shooting.

Dear Ms. Price:

Regarding your piece, Targeted By Gun Nuts appearing in the August 13, 2006 edition of The Los Angeles Times – Jenny Price is a freelance writer and research scholar at the UCLA Center for the Study of Women – perhaps I can answer in the civil tone you long for.

Ms. Price, no matter what I feel, no matter what I believe and no matter how much I hurt, I do not have the moral or legal right to stop you from publishing what you like to publish. No matter what you say, unless it is defamatory or otherwise established as illegal, I have no right to silence you.

No matter how other writers may have defamed some, and no matter how many companies may have falsely advertised, no matter how many litigants have lied under oath, been outright wrong in their allegations or no matter how many editors have mistakenly broadcast or published news which turned out to be untrue – I have positively no right to silence you.

No matter how many may have last year and no matter how many will defame, lie under oath, mistake or falsely advertise this year, I have no right to silence you, Jenny.

And I have no right even to call for silencing you. Because I have no right to stifle your civil right.

If you believe in your civil right of a free press, then you must believe also in my right to own a weapon also guaranteed by the very same document that recognizes your right to write, publish and speak.

Because taking weapons from other Americans is the equivalent of silencing writers like us. I disagree with you intensely, but I would not silence you, nor would I call for you to surrender your column’s computer based on something I didn’t like.

Our amendment – the freedom of the press – says that Congress shall make no law, but states and others may. It is not absolute. We have responsibilities. Our second amendment – also your amendment and everyone else’s – has no such language, it is absolute and says shall not be infringed. We, too, have responsibilities, and we meet them well.

You wrote that, because of some unkind blogs which responded to your article, gun owners should forfeit their weapons: this is, of course to punish us for what some say, something I doubt very much you would be for if the situation were reversed: Oh, excuse me, that is the heart of your article: that you were punished for what you wrote.

Your whole article was a rant on how you cannot take the heat for what you write; why punish others for what they write in response? And why take away weapons of those who wrote back? They simply answered in kind – in writing. Confiscating weapons for how someone answers your piece makes about as much sense as insisting on banning your computer for the conduct of others, doesn’t it? Or worse: for what you decided to write. They merely spoke their mind – as you and I do – and you wish to punish them.

This is our complaint with the media – punishing. This does not make The Times a very good ambassador for the First, does it?

Meanwhile,  gun owners work very, very hard to be the best ambassadors we can be for our second amendment, and we do a pretty good job of it, do we not? As you mentioned, it is not the legitimate gun owner who is committing the crimes. You know it in your mind, but you do not permit this to reach you inside.

I understand how your feelings right about now would be of anger and grief at the loss of your brother five years ago – understandable – but you’re aiming at the wrong target. Legitimate gun owners did not do the shooting, and no matter how hurt you are by the loss of your loved one, Ms. Price, it is irrational to write what you wrote (if I may quote a few extra lines):

“I’d spent a week in the company of people with closed minds and cold hearts. And what saddens me most is that vengeful intolerance is all too common and leads people every day to reach for a handgun to kill people.”

 [Note: Did anyone pick up a gun and come to shoot you, Ms. Price?]

“I can cite statistics, and I can tell you why the right to carry a 9-millimeter semiautomatic handgun with a 10-shot clip is not guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment. But the paranoia and bone-chilling hatred that spew from such sites as packing.org and freerepublic.com make for an equally — and unusually — effective argument for a ban on handguns.”

This dialogue which seems difficult for you to process is purely an understandably sensitive response to your call to breach their civil right while you keep yours. Let me say again, Ms. Price, than none of these law-abiding killed your brother: a person with a criminal mind long before he ever picked up a gun killed your brother. Only one person killed your brother, not a whole segment of Americans.

Your gun owning neighbors, retired police and military and other legitimate owners you may not even be aware of did not do the shooting any more than you as a columnist joined the unethical in writing false advertising, defamation, committed perjury or any other illegal act under color of our first amendment.

How right would it be for anyone to silence you? How right is it for you to call for the silencing of others? How right would it be for us to protect your right to say what you want as we do, whether you believe it or not?

You were not targeted by gun nuts, Madam, you were targeted by a criminal who broke your heart. Condolences on the death of your brother, Ms. Price, but we didn’t do it. Your anger should be at his killer, as an individual, and not your fellow Americans who share the bill of rights with you – and, I dare say, who do a whale of a lot more protecting your right to a free press than the press does in protecting our right to defend that free press, along with other rights. It reflects, Ms. Price, a poor understanding of what rights both you and I have and the powerful responsibility we have to each other.

I understand that it is the grief talking.

I wish you calm and the release from your grief, I wish you safety and most of all I wish us all Liberty.

Yours in Liberty,

John Longenecker

Rate this post:

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...