The lengths they'll go to spread their anti-gun message

On October 22, a letter to the editor entitled "Walks show concealed carry
is unneeded" was published in the Columbus Dispatch, under the name Lori
O'Neill. O'Neill is the President of the Cleveland chapter of the so-called
"Million" Mom March.

A response was published on this website the following day: Gun Control Extremists Advocate Open Carry?!?

In the November 5, 2003 issue of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, a letter
entitled "Carrying guns in plain view is wiser alternative" was published
under the name Jackie Spector of Parma.

The letters are identical.

Click here to read the letter, under the name Lori
O'Neill, in the October 22, 2003 Columbus Dispatch.

Click here to read the same letter, under the name Jackie Spector, in the November 5, 2003 Cleveland Plain
Dealer.

Aside from questions of ethics, would it not have been much more appropriate for Spector to have spent a little time and brainpower writing her own letter, rather than plagarizing O'Neill?

What follows are letters from some pro-CCW letter-writers, all of whom managed to squeeze out their own original ideas and get them published in the past few days.

Concealed-carry critic misunderstands
issue
November 2, 2003

In response to Lori O'Neill's Oct. 22 letter "Walks show concealed carry is
unneeded,'' I think she has missed the point of these defense walks
completely.

The walks are not designed to make people feel uncomfortable but to show
that those who support a law allowing the concealed carry of handguns are
not the bloodthirsty zealots that she would like to portray us as. Though
one would think the presence of concealed-carry laws in 90 percent of the
country would have already demonstrated this.

Supporters of a concealed-carry law simply are citizens who desire the
ability to protect themselves, and as the walks have shown, people do not
start shooting their fellow citizens simply because they have a gun in their
possession. O'Neill's organization, Million Mom March, repeatedly claims
that citizens carrying weapons would lead to shootouts over simple
arguments. Yet not one of the participants in these walks responded
violently, even when heckled by members of her organization.

Furthermore, if the possession of an instrument that can cause "instant
injury or death'' should be a source of alarm, then concealed-carry
supporters would be much more concerned about driving in a car than walking
with a firearm.

All of the organizers of these walks called law-enforcement agencies ahead
of time, informed them of their intentions and welcomed law enforcement to
send observers. Recent events have shown that an individual carrying a
firearm openly without such advance notice will be detained, if not
arrested.

Finally, carrying openly is much less of a deterrent than carrying
concealed. Criminals have shown they either will avoid armed individuals or
take them out first. This does little to protect the public as a whole.
Rather, Ohio should follow the lead of nearly every other state in the union
and allow the deterrent effect of a few armed, law-abiding citizens to cause
uncertainty and fear in the criminal element, thus lowering the crime rate
for the law-abiding public.

JOE ROSENBERG
Columbus

Time for a sensible concealed carry law
November 1, 2003

Once again, I find our current leadership in Ohio lacking. We have heard of
the "streetside" shoot-outs that will happen should we be given the right
citizens in 46 other states already possess - the right to carry a weapon
concealed. Where, I ask, if the shoot-outs would happen, are the bloody news
stories from the blood-draining other states? They do not exist.

Gov. Taft can say that the average citizen should not have the right to stop
a possible crime by exercising a right to carry concealed, and yet he enjoys
security the taxpayers pay - so he does not worry. Where, Gov. Taft, do you
expect me to carry on as I want, doing my business as usual, and not be
worried at all about crime? Will you provide private security for me and my
family, who travel to Cincinnati each month for our son's doctor visits, so
we feel protected? We travel along some of the most crime-ridden streets,
and yet, if we were to believe you, all we need is the city of Cincinnati's
police to protect us? Will they drive alongside my vehicle, so we are safe?
It has been said by numerous police agencies that the police are reactive,
not pro-active. Do we call them before we go to the store or bank, where we
think a robbery might occur? We do not have enough police officers for that.
Then how is the average citizen supposed to be able to protect himself? How
many times a year is a citizen, just merely by showing his/her legally
concealed weapon, able to thwart an unlawful act? How many lives have been
saved by an armed citizen when the need arose?

How many people would allow a criminal to harm their family when, if given a
choice, showing a weapon could prevent it? Would you like to look back and
(know that) if you had merely carried, your loved one or ones could be alive
today?

The time has come for a sensible concealed carry law, and not one which
tries to appease all factions. Let us look to our neighbor states for
examples, and not for Taft to tell us our rights - as he sees them.

JIM BERRY
Middletown