At that time it wasn’t unsual for the New York Times to editorialize on behalf of our military’s choice of weaponry.ĭon’t besmirch our men at arms who rigorously train for their assigned duties. I suspect that the “Sniper” add was directed at our Military, perhaps a century ago when the rifle depicted was state-of-the-art. Sadly though, despite years of history where firearms and their legitimate uses have helped to secure our freedoms, our Media insists on focusing undue attention on the acts of a few aberrant members of society who choose to misuse firearms and thereby inflict grievous injury on innocents. Ironic, huh?įor the most part I enjoyed reading your opinion piece, as firearms and shooting sports have long been a part of my life. I don’t hunt any more, but still appreciate firearms and their value both as artifacts and as weapons. As a youth I poured through the gun magazines and loved the ads as much as the content. My father was an associate editor of Field and Stream, wrote a daily Rod and Gun column for the NY Times for 25 years and wrote over a dozen books on hunting and fishing. I grew up with guns…had about 40 of them by the time I went into the service. The tone of the article was not blatantly antigun, so to get a response such as that of japhillips makes one wonder if a gun should ever be placed in the hands of japhillips.
Even Eli Witney of New Haven applied his revolutionary concept of mass production to the manufacturing of firearms. My home, Connecticut, a blue, liberal leaning state if ever there was one is, or was, home to Winchester, Marlin, Colt and Ruger. Guns appears to bring out the irony of life, so it is no surprise that the reactions were so strong. You could shoot holes through some of his arguments with one of those 50’s Daisy airguns. I think regardless of the subject, though, Gene needs to do a bit more research into something if he’s going to take such a defining position. We put meat on the table (anyone who huts strictly for trophy has no business in the woods) and sustain and support our families We put animal heads and skins in our trophy rooms, and we’re proud of the heritage we have, those of us that pursue game as we do. Yes, hunting is KILLING, it’s not harvesting, collecting, or whatever else you want to call it. It’s a great way to spend time with your children and family, promote outdoor activities, learn CONSERVATION and build relationships. Fully Automatic weapons (think AK-47s) are illegal in this country, and no self-respecting hunter would even consider using such a weapon in his or her pursuit.įact of the matter is, despite what Gene may be trying to portray here, hunting and the shooting sports are safe, family-friendly activities, and they also happen to be on the rise. This is especially handy when hunting flushing birds or fast-moving rabbits. All that means is that rounds can be fired in succession, one round being fired with each pull of the triggger. I happen to own a SEMI-Automatic Winchester 1200 Autoloading (more appropriate terminology) Shotgun. Gene’s reference to Automatic weapons is a misnomer.
Rugged man photo gun free#
I’m one of those blue-state liberals as well, but hunting also takes up a considerable part of my free time, even if it is more with a bow than a gun. I’ma huge fan of Gene’s work, but I think he fell a little short on this one. Considering how many guns there are they are rarely misused. You are not likely to see an advertisement from Ford or GM about how cool you’ll be driving under the influence and killing people in one of their new vehicles, are you? That scenario happens far more often than gun violence but that’s not the intention of the auto makers, it is not controllable by them, nor is it by any stretch of the imagination the normal outcome of driving a vehicle. But those aren’t images you’re likely to see in any gun advertising.” “I did find the ad below, fittingly from Winchester, that hinted at the sort of gun violence to come…. By even putting those two words in the same sentence you disrespect every REAL sniper that has worked hard to protect this country so you could make ridiculous comments like that. Every reference you made was referring to a deranged murderer… not a sniper.
You’re are confusing MURDERERs with SNIPERs. “Snipers don’t hunt deer - they hide out in school book depositories, clock towers, and the hollowed-out trunks of beat-up Plymouths.” Could the “sniper” ad have been targeted to the military? Obviously a difficult concept to get but a very probable answer.
0 kommentar(er)
