We all know what a biased, one sided joke the Bradford Error is, so if they don't publish this letter at least it's here. If only I was this eloquent. This is via Ralph Brooks.
My letter to the editor of the Bradford Era:
To whom it may concern;
I am currently living in Olean, but am planning on returning to the Northern PA area in the next few months. I picked up a copy of the Era to skim real estate ads.
I was shocked and rather saddened by the piece entitled, 'Find Gun Violence Solutions', which, among being founded on some misconceptions, was also fraught with blatant bias.
Initially, I reacted in a typically agitated way due to the fact that it contains some of the tired, repeated and misleading rhethoric that suggests the 2nd Amendment is somehow tied to hunting or defense of your house; Not so. Nearly every time a 2nd Amendment case comes before the Supreme Court, the ruling is in the favor of the gun owner and supports the individual right to keep and bear arms not only in the home, but upon the person outside the home as personal protection (Moore/Shephard vs. State of Illinois). Moreover, the decision includes text that the SCOTUS is not inclined to continue hearing these same cases and that precedent has been set.
The right to carry a gun, not just own one for hunting or your house, is established.
I can probably skip repeating the argument that, in the last 25 years, there have been only two shootings in a place OTHER than a gun free zone. Mass shooters pick targets which are without armed resistance; This is fact, and cannot be ignored.
I can probably skip digging out the several quotes from the many founding fathers who clearly intended the 2nd Amendment not as a tool for hunting, or defense from criminals, but as a means to secure our nation, even if it meant securing our nation from an overzealous government or tyrant seeking to deprive us of our rights.
As we speak, Diane Feinstein is drafting legislation that will do just that; Every firearm I own, including my wifes tiny .380 KelTec pocket pistol, will be banned. The only things left? Revolvers, bolt actions, top break shotguns. The very definition of tyrant seeking to deprive us of our rights.
There was also a statement that modern sporting rifles (Which you assign the term 'Assault Rifle' which is incorrect; An assault rifle is capable of full auto or burst fire, which these do not. They function no differently than a Ruger 10/22 or Mini 14) have no sporting purpose. Perhaps not in PA, but they are legal to hunt with in many states, NY included. This is a moot point, however, when the 2nd Amendment was not drafted with hunting or shooting targets in mind.
It also went on to attack the local Representatives, whom are all very accurately reflecting the will of our rural area.
The most unnerving aspect of the piece, however, was the fact that this heavily biased editorial that chose to exploit a tragedy was not presented as an editorial by an individual, but signed 'The Bradford Era'.
How can a news outlet have an opinion? Or rather, why?
Is not the job of a newspaper to report the news, rather than show bias on current events?
The last bastion of unbiased, unfiltered, uncorrupted news, is the local newspaper. What a shame that credibility has been destroyed in an effort to advance a political motive; A political motive whose end is statistically proven to be ineffective in ensuring the safety of Americans.
Instead of one person feeling the backlash of what is assuredly greater than 50% of the local population, and the three gun shops in the Bradford area who are some of the only businesses left prospering there, it will be the Bradford Era that takes the brunt of the ire.
Much like Chick-Fil-A was slammed by people saying, 'Why does a restaurant have an opinion on gay marriage?', I anticipate many will repeat, 'Why does a newspaper have an opinion on my gun collection?'
Olean, NY (Soon to be Bradford, PA)
Closed minds STOP thought crimes!