Response to Cinc. Post Ed.

From: "Quigley, Thomas (QUIGLETW)" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]

To The Editor:

Your "Editorial, Chasing the Wrong Answer," is itself the wrong answer.

As could be expected, you parrot the liberal party line, and continue to occupy a politically correct fantasy world wherein the police are capable of teleporting instantaneously to the scene of any ongoing crime to provide assured safety for all Cincinnatians, where criminals don't already carry guns at will, and where the best way to prepare for the possibility of violent crime is to make yourself as defenseless as possible. You probably think that laws against concealed carry make criminals think twice, that owning or carrying a gun puts you and your family at greater risk than not owning one, that we're not in danger from criminals unless someone is inclined to stand up to them, and that it is wrong to carry a gun for self-defense, but unfortunate, unavoidable and not relevant to this issue when an unarmed person dies at the hands of a criminal.

The thought of legal self-defense even outside of one's home may be "scary" to those of you true believers who think that public servants are completely responsible for your safety, but for many others like me who lived in uncomfortably close quarters to the riots, and the ongoing crime wave in our city, it seems self-evident that not only are we all responsible for our own safety, but it is reasonable and responsible to be prepared for such an occurrence. Are you aware that no police department has ever been successfully sued for failing to protect an individual citizen? That's right, your individual safety is NOT THEIR JOB. Are you aware that only one-quarter of 911 calls are responded to in less than five minutes? Still want to bet your life on it?

This is not a "philosophical fantasy"--it is hard, cold reality: If the bad guys are armed, and it is clear that there are plenty of bad guys in this city that are armed, everybody else must either avoid many neighborhoods in this city (some of us can't; we live in them); break the existing law against concealed carry, or hope we are lucky. Nor was it a "philosophical fantasy" that people were pulled out of their cars only a few months ago and beaten with rocks and bottles. Violence is very real in this city. It is, however, a fantasy to think we will ever get guns "off the streets," i.e., out of the hands of violent criminals.

The media, yourself included, tends to portray gun ownership, and concealed carry, as more dangerous than not. Often, ideologically slanted and methodologically flawed studies by doctors and sociologists (of one particular political persuasion, need I say which?) are quoted to support your perspective. If you were to wake up and investigate the other side, you would notice that there is a body of far more substantial and methodologically sound evidence supporting not only the benefits of gun ownership, but concealed carry. There are 44 other states with some form of concealed carry, none of whom have reported increased shootouts between "bozos" who carry for self defense. Get the facts straight instead of spouting Al Gore's party line.

I cordially invite you to move to California, New York, or Massachusetts, where there are plenty of other Starry-eyed Socialist Sheep who share your point of view.

Sincerely,
Thomas W. Quigley.

You may view the original editorial at: http://www.cincypost.com/2001/aug/13/edita081301.html

To Get Your Letters Printed Here
Click here and read submission guidelines.