• 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.

Essay I wrote brought it to Bellingham Herald

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

No they didn't it's what I expected though. Nice to meet you your wife and beautiful baby.

I am going to call editor and find out what he thinks my feeling is as been posted here is that it needs to be shortened which I am working on a shorter version.
 

tinytina

New member
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
1
Location
, ,
imported post

Before they print they have to research every state and comment you gave to make sure they are true. So I doubt they will go through all that trouble.
 

Nitrox314

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
194
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
No they didn't it's what I expected though. Nice to meet you your wife and beautiful baby.

I am going to call editor and find out what he thinks my feeling is as been posted here is that it needs to be shortened which I am working on a shorter version.

Good luck.... I used to write articles and such for them back in Iraq. (They ran a front page on me and my family!) The guy in charge of LTE (Letters to Editor) was good. The management staff was good. Then it went downhill. I think the far-left took control of the Herald because I was writingLTE's and the new lady kept saying they were too long and had to be shortened to 200 words or less. I tried but couldn't. I took a look at the the LTE's that were being submitted. I would say 8 of 10 were leftist and were 400 words or more. I ended up telling her that I couldn't put the whole truth in only 200 words and never wrote to them again.

So... Good luck!
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

They have been leftist for a long time. Glad you had a good editor for awhile.

Welcome tinytina, hope you contribute more to the forum. And I have seen them print lots of data and gloss over "important facts".
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

Ok so here is the super short version. I wrote it had some interesting conversations with a journalist who posted a good story about one our Open carry guys in California protesting at a gun buy back in Compton I believe. She helped me edited this shorter one I wrote. Bellingham still won't take it for Op Ed they only accept 200 words.

Before everyone get's on me about the statistics in the few weeks between rewriting CDC.Gov had changed statistics and the way they format there site. But all of the following is accurate to the best of my knowledge. And I was forced to compare 2006 gun deaths to 2007 deaths by neglect or abuse.

She also edited my longer version and it reads much better, but at 800 words doubt anyone will publish it, but if anyone wants to submit the following to papers, magazines or articles as long as it gets properly credited especially since I had Allison's help. (She is now interested in going to the range and has family up here in Washington)


Forget Gun Control, We Need Parent Control


According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1,549 children ages 17 and younger were killed by firearms in the United States in 2006. The following year, approximately 1,760 died from abuse or neglect ]

Pertaining to death by abuse[/b]Seventy-six percent or more deaths occurred among children younger than age 4; 13 percent among 4- to 7-year-olds; 5 percent among 8- to 11-year-olds; 5 percent among 12- to 15-year-olds; and 2 percent among 16- to 17- year-olds,”according to the CDC’s Web site, http://www.cdc.gov.

[/b]Eighty-nine percent of the children killed by neglect/abuse, or 1,559.36, were under age 7; 94 percent, or 1,647, were under age 12. In 2006, less than 10 percent of children under the age of 12, or 176, were killed by firearms.

According to the Administration for Children and Families, http://www.acf.hhs.gov, statistics [/b]for 2007 show that 1,091 children under age 7, or 70 percent, were killed due to abuse or neglect by their parents, while in 2006, 102 children were killed by firearm. This suggests that parents are more than 1,000 percent more dangerous than firearms.

Some kids around 12-13 begin associating with gangs, and sadly, some kill themselves. “Kids” ages 14-17 are having sex, having babies, driving, drinking, indulging in drugs and other “adult” activities. They are not acting like the children we think of when “experts” bring up statistics. The majority of teens killed by firearms are involved in criminal activity Where are their parents? Should we regulate who can have children? After all, it’s for our “kid’s safety.”



Robert M. Stratton
Edited by: Allison Jean Eaton



 

heresolong

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,318
Location
Blaine, WA, ,
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
Seventy-six percent or more deaths occurred among children younger than age 4; 13 percent among 4- to 7-year-olds; 5 percent among 8- to 11-year-olds; 5 percent among 12- to 15-year-olds; and 2 percent among 16- to 17- year-olds,” according to the CDC’s Web site, http://www.cdc.gov. (Deaths by abuse or neglect)]


Eighty-nine percent of those children, or 1,559.36, were under age 7; 94 percent, or 1,647, were under age 12. In 2006, less than 10 percent of children under the age of 12, or 176, were killed by firearms.

Nice article but the two sentences above confuse me. I would insert the "death by..." clause into the beginning of each sentence so that it is clear to what you are referring.

Specifically, to what does the 89% refer at the beginning of the second sentence?
 

Aryk45XD

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
513
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
According to the Administration for Children and Families, http://www.acf.hhs.gov, statistics for 2007 show that 1,091 children under age 7, or 70 percent, were killed due to abuse or neglect by their parents, while in 2006, 102 children were killed by firearm. This suggests that parents are more than 1,000 percent more dangerous than firearms.

Some kids around 12-13 begin associating with gangs, and sadly, some kill themselves. “Kids” ages 14-17 are having sex, having babies, driving, drinking, indulging in drugs and other “adult” activities. They are not acting like the children we think of when “experts” bring up statistics. The majority of teens killed by firearms are involved in criminal activity Where are their parents? Should we regulate who can have children? After all, it’s for our “kid’s safety.”



Robert M. Stratton
Edited by: Allison Jean Eaton
Very nice.
 
Top