Letters to the Editors

The feds give NRA reason to resist

© St. Petersburg Times, published July 9, 2000

I had to tell you how much I enjoyed the articles in the July 2 Perspective section. The two articles -- The changing face of NRA, by Osha Gray Davidson, and Government protecting us to death, by Robyn Blumner -- couldn't have been more ironic.

On one hand, you have what the author perceives as a national organization run amok and, on the other, a government that has to control every aspect of our lives. Davidson obviously takes great umbrage at the present state of the National Rifle Association, and Blumner discusses the autocratic rule of the federal government.

From my simple perspective, the NRA has become politically active because of the overwhelming authority the federal government has on everything a so-called citizen can do. Yes, in the case of the NRA, the lead factor is gun control, but isn't any group that fights against a social injustice doing the same thing? The federal government doesn't mind at all running roughshod over states' rights.

Many states have allowed the use of medical marijuana. Because the feds won't do the same because of the "war on drugs" thing, they vehemently prosecute anyone who doesn't fall in line. Yet, as the NRA rightfully states, why aren't the feds prosecuting more cases related to gun violence -- which leads to the stated scenario: "Why don't you enforce the gun laws currently on the books?"

The bottom line? Whatever the feds want, they will get. We have states' rights and a Second Amendment -- both have been under federal fire for generations. The Times would do well to print more articles like these, showing the blatant abuse of power by the federal government. Maybe more people would understand why there is a politically active NRA and other organizations fighting against social injustice.
-- Paul Lukacs, Seminole

A frightening government

On Sunday you ran an article describing the takeover of the National Rifle Association by "extremists" who are using "fear mongering" to block so-called reasonable government attempts at gun control. Right next to that article was a Robyn Blumner column illustrating just how a government run amok led to the death of Peter McWilliams by denying him the only medicine that helped: legalized marijuana. The fact that it had been legalized seemed to be of no interest to federal agents bent on stamping out any legitimate use.

Is it any wonder that the NRA is so successful with its "fear the government" campaign? Peter McWilliams, Ruby Ridge, David Koresh, etc. Don't you think that maybe the centralized federal government is getting a little too big and powerful? Is it, perhaps, time to step back and take a look at decentralization and an overall reduction of government interference in our lives?
-- Steve Dorr, New Port Richey

Give NRA equal time

Re: The changing face of NRA.

Osha Davidson, the author of this article as well as an anti-NRA book, is well aware that the majority of the 3-million members of the National Rifle Association are law-abiding, taxpaying Americans whose views just happen to disagree with his.

I am a lifetime supporter of the NRA, as is everyone in my family who owns a firearm. There are too many laws on the books now that infringe on the rights of Americans to bear arms.

The good men who wrote our Constitution knew full well that it had nothing to do with Davidson's "old .22." No, it was to protect this country from men exactly like Adolf Hitler from taking over.

In case anyone didn't notice, there was an article by Robyn Blumner, right next to your picture of the NRA goon holding the Russian AK-47, titled Government protecting us to death.

So, to give proper "perspective" about gun control, why not give someone from the NRA equal space on the front page of our favorite political newspaper section -- someone from Florida, someone who is not trying to sell a book?
-- Guy Nash, St. Petersburg

Voters will be heard

Thanks for publishing The changing face of NRA on Sunday. This kind of yellow journalism will only help to bring people out in record numbers to vote in November.

It is pretty obvious how the St. Petersburg Times feels on the subject or its editors wouldn't have trotted out an associate professor from a rural university. Ever been to Iowa? Nice place and friendly people but relatively low on crime and with a homogeneous population. Probably a pretty easy place to pontificate from, huh?

A lot of us are just tired of inept national leadership that doesn't represent us and will be heard at election time.
-- Rande Ricketts, St. Petersburg

We are the government

Re: The changing face of NRA.

We, the people, do not have to worry about taking up arms against our government because we are the government. What we have to worry about is an organized group that would take up arms against our government.

The NRA has recruited a man who is admired by most all Americans. Sometimes putting the spotlight on a "has been" can cloud his thinking, and he would do most anything to get back into that spotlight. Charlton Heston is being "used" to recruit NRA members at $35 a pop to fight an "invisible" enemy. Who or what is this enemy? Believe it or not, it is we the people (our government).

A democracy can only work if everyone believes in and obeys its country's laws. The wackos at Waco would all be alive today if they had obeyed our laws. (Do not take up arms against our government, we the people.) If you don't believe in a certain law, then change it. That's the democratic way.
-- Donald F. Kelly, St. Petersburg

A war on users

Re: Government protecting us to death, July 2.

Thank you for down-to-earth commentary by Robyn Blumner. It's a shame that our war on drugs has turned into a war on drug users. Rather than reduce drug usage, marijuana prohibition has only caused overpopulated prisons and organized crime ventures.

We should follow the example of Spain, Switzerland and the Netherlands in allowing responsible adults to use marijuana (which, incidentally, has no documented fatal overdoses). Or we can lock up our 20-million marijuana users -- the choice is ours.
-- Thomas Wallace, St. Petersburg

Sexualized kids

Re: Shrink-wrapping: a girl group, July 2.

Yuck! Can you say "Lolita?"

Making up 14-year-olds to look like legal adults seems somehow pedophilic to me. Why can't we let children be children, without sexing them up?

With the self-esteem issues, anorexia, bulimia and depression that the media tell us are pandemic in children (including teens) these days, I think the last thing America needs is four little girls making other little girls wish they looked like the fantasy models on magazine covers.

I recently watched a television show that discussed a photo shoot Christina Aguilera did for the cover of Seventeen magazine. She wanted to show more skin and look more suggestive than the editors felt was appropriate for the teens who read the magazine. Apparently Aguilera has learned that sex sells, which is what the four PYT group members seem to be learning. Marketing these children, which is what they are, to men, which is what is being done, is disgusting.

Girl power, and its successor, woman power, mean demanding respect for your morals and personal ability, respecting yourself and treating your body with respect. They mean knowing that intelligence, truth, honesty and hard work equal success.

Girl power does not equal exposed belly buttons, painted lips parted suggestively and tight shirts. That's what Hollywood would like us to believe, however, and that's what it is trying to sell us.

I, for one, am not buying it.
-- Harriet K. Protos, Naples

A cultural problem

Re: The University of Florida's Great Divide, July 2.

When we decided to move permanently to Florida five years ago from Ann Arbor, Mich., we thought it would be nice to move to Gainesville. The pine trees reminded us of Michigan, the town would probably be similar to Ann Arbor and the University of Florida would certainly remind us of the University of Michigan. We put money down on a lot and then visited the Catholic Church we would be attending. The priest discouraged us from coming to Gainesville right from the start. He understood that Ann Arbor is very liberal and the University of Michigan is just as liberal. He told us that we have to go south in Florida to go north, and he was correct.

We left Gainesville behind us, and we have never been sorry. Gerardo Gonzalez's comment in the article that the real obstacle is cultural is certainly right on. It isn't just the students. I know from talking to people from Florida that they don't know that they are being racist.

It will take more than just throwing more scholarship money at the students to change the way people feel. And since Gainesville is predominantly a college town made up of students and people who work at the university, it will take generations for Gainesville to change also.

If I were a minority educator, I would certainly think twice before going to the University of Florida and Gainesville. Good luck.
-- Mary Lou Jenkins, Largo

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.