• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Richmond Times Dispatch columnist reports on "gun rally"

riverrat10k

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
1,472
Location
on a rock in the james river
imported post

From the Jan. 20 Richmond Times Dispatch. This is actually pretty mild from Williams. More reporting and less opinion than usual. Selective reporting of course.The good news is the counter-lobbyists were outnumbered at least 200 to 3 according to his own report. Interesting that the MMM guy thinks a gun killed King, rather than the truth that he was killed by a criminal.


Protesters ridiculed at gun rally

By Michael Paul Williams

Published: January 20, 2009

Three people stood out at the pro-gun rights rally on the holiday celebration of a nonviolent American martyr.

Each bore signs with photos of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Abraham Lincoln, and John and Robert Kennedy beneath the message "Guns Didn't Save These Lives."

They were silently protesting a Virginia Citizens Defense League rally against gun regulation, which drew about 200 gun-rights supporters to the state Capitol Bell Tower at 11 a.m.

"Today is a day set aside to honor a peace-loving person who was killed by a gun," said Andrew L. Goddard of the Richmond chapter of the Million Mom March and the father of a survivor of the April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech shootings.

"I don't think it honors Martin Luther King to be out here expounding on the virtues of guns," said Goddard, who was joined by Lori Haas, the mother of another surviving Tech victim, and Alice Mountjoy of the Virginia Center for Public Safety.

After Mountjoy left, the two remaining protesters were held up to ridicule by one of the rally's speakers, Mary Katharine Ham, a regular on "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News. "Two of them, that's cute," she said.

Ham, 28, a blogger for The Weekly Standard magazine, asked why the protesters weren't lying down -- a reference to a "die-in" protest last week outside the state Capitol by families affected by the Tech massacre.

She criticized those who questioned the appropriateness of the rally on King's holiday -- ironic at an event focused on individual rights.

But her attitude was typical of the rally's half-dozen speakers. Anyone in favor of gun restrictions was dismissed as a self-promoting egotist, ignorant or simply freedom-hating. Sometimes, the swagger on display would have made Clint Eastwood blush. The cheering crowd ate it up.

"I have always found that a 9 millimeter is a hell of an equalizer," Ham said on the usefulness of firearms for women.

Ham also tried to turn King into an NRA poster person by quoting from a 1966 speech by the civil-rights leader.

"It goes without saying that people will protect their homes. This is a right guaranteed by the Constitution and respected even in the worst areas of the South," she quoted King as saying, as if such an assertion placed King in league with Charlton Heston.

The title of King's speech -- "Nonviolence: The Only Road to Freedom" -- gave the remarks a context Ham attempted to strip from them.

Her speech avoided other King quotes, such as:

"Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him."

And: "By our readiness to allow arms to be purchased at will and fired at whim . . . we have created an atmosphere in which violence and hatred have become popular pastimes."

To suggest that King would march in lockstep with this pro-gun crowd is an assault on his legacy.



And, OT, but another tragic killing at Va. Tech. Sad that the woman was not allowed to carry a gun for protection on campus. Guy chopped off her head with a kitchen knife. Awful.

rat
 

hsmith

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2007
Messages
1,687
Location
Virginia USA, ,
imported post

So the entire article was devoted to how the VCDL and its members are "bigots". The three "counter protestors" are all fine in their ways, their protests were pure as the driven snow and right. But anyone standing for gun rights is a terrible human.

Trash.

Surprised he didnt' try to throw in there how those OC'ing were trying to"intimidate" the "protestors"
 

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
imported post

puke.gif
 

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,
imported post

Michael Paul Williams is the black guy talking to one of the antisin one of the pictures that was posted on this site.
 

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,
imported post

Michael Paul Williams is a bigot and a disgrace to the Richmond Times Dispatch. He has recieved lots and lots of complaints.

Someone should tell that ignoramous that Charleton Heston marched with Dr. King.
 

Dutch Uncle

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
1,715
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Indeed, very poorly thought out. Apparentlyy the "journalist" couldn't wrap his liberal head around the two different concepts Rev. King was trying to describe. One, the perfectly valid use of deadly force to protect one's home and family, and two, the perfectly valid concept of eschewing violence as a means of achieving social justice. The two are completely different, and by writing about both, King assumed the reader would be able to grasp the essential differences in intent and purpose between the two. Evidently he didn't anticipate someone as addled as Mr. Williams trying to interpret his writings.

A pity. :?
 

Neplusultra

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Messages
2,224
Location
Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

Dutch Uncle wrote:
Indeed, very poorly thought out. Apparentlyy the "journalist" couldn't wrap his liberal head around the two different concepts Rev. King was trying to describe. One, the perfectly valid use of deadly force to protect one's home and family, and two, the perfectly valid concept of eschewing violence as a means of achieving social justice. The two are completely different, and by writing about both, King assumed the reader would be able to grasp the essential differences in intent and purpose between the two. Evidently he didn't anticipate someone as addled as Mr. Williams trying to interpret his writings.

A pity. :?
Well said Dutch...

edit: You ought to email that to him, see what he says.
 

hsmith

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2007
Messages
1,687
Location
Virginia USA, ,
imported post

I wonder if people from the VCDL go "counter protest" the MMM he will write the same kind of glowing review.
 

Armed

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
418
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

ProShooter wrote:
I emailed a few thoughts to the reporter the other day. I have yet to receive a reply.

I doubt that I will.
I blast this nut everytime he writes that drivel. I never hear back from him either.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Armed wrote:
ProShooter wrote:
I emailed a few thoughts to the reporter the other day. I have yet to receive a reply.

I doubt that I will.
I blast this nut everytime he writes that drivel. I never hear back from him either.

Hmmmm. Just thinkin' out loud here.

I wonder if the paper supports his position. Maybe the editorial staff wants it for controversy. (GoogleMark Twain's short story, Journalism in Tennessee. The text of the story is available on-line and is a very quick, but funny read.)

I wonder how it would work to try a different angle.

"Dear Editor,

While I appreciate Mr. Williams attempt to educate the public against guns, I think he is being entirely too soft on the subject. I would like to see in his stories something stronger, something that states his position more explicitly. The public really deserves to know the truth on this."

Nellie"

Then maybe he writes something too caustic or too obviously critical. And gets a real public backlash.

Ooops. Is my agent provocatuer tendency showing? And I didn't even see Nakedshoplifter at the VCDL meeting. :)
 

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,
imported post

Armed wrote:
On the brighter side... and by some miracle... a more factual and honesteditorial was printed by the Times Disatch regarding gun shows on 23 Jan. The article did not credit any particular author, it was simply listed as "staff report".

http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/opinion/editorials/article/EDGUNSHOW_20090122-182902/186092/

By Staff Reports

Published: January 23, 2009

Recently the state Crime Commission deadlocked over whether to recommend closing the so-called gun-show loophole. The issue has become a perennial at the General Assembly, which is considering the matter once again this year. Once again, legislators should vote no.

Licensed firearms dealers -- those who buy and sell guns as a business -- are required to conduct background checks on prospective buyers. The "loophole" in question refers to the fact that individuals selling guns from their own private collection do not have to -- either within gun-show venues, or in the parking lot, or in their own homes.

Gun-control advocates often muddy the issue by referring to "unlicensed dealers" at gun shows, of which there are indeed many. They sell holsters, flashlights, hunting knives, T-shirts, books, gun safes -- even jewelry. But an unlicensed dealer who sold guns as a business would invite felony charges under federal law.

Gun-control advocates also suggest, albeit with scant evidence, that gun shows supply a significant share of the weapons used in crime. Federal data indicate otherwise. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics report, "Firearm Use by Offenders," only about 1 percent of guns used in crimes come from gun shows. In fact, most crime guns -- 57 percent -- come from just 1 percent of licensed dealers. Federal and state law-enforcement agencies should come down on those renegade dealers like a ton of bricks.

Another study, by the FBI concerning attacks on law-enforcement officials, found that 97 percent of the offenders had procured their weapons through illegal means. Private sales among the hunters and target-shooting enthusiasts who frequent gun shows are simply not a significant source of weapons used in crimes.

Gun shows, then, are not the real issue -- except to those who recoil viscerally at the sight of large numbers of firearms in one place. Referring to a "gun-show loophole" muddies the issue by implying, falsely, that individuals can sell or buy guns freely and without background checks only at gun shows. In fact, they can do so many places.

The real issue, in fact, is incidental firearms sales by private individuals -- whether at gun shows or anywhere else.

Now there is an argument to be made that any such sales should be more tightly regulated, perhaps even recorded and reported to the authorities -- just as home and car sales are. Over time, that would amount to de facto firearm registration. Some gun-control advocates say that is not their wish. But given the weaknesses in the case for closing the gun-show loophole, one has to wonder.
 
Top