<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>JWMB - The Original John Wayne Message Board!</title>
		<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/</link>
		<description>This is a discussion forum for John Wayne Fans world wide. JWMB is the largest John Wayne fan community on the web. Visit Dukewayne.com to discuss John Wayne movies, westerns, career, life.</description>
		<language>en</language>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 09:48:25 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>vBulletin</generator>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
		
		<item>
			<title>(New Review) Classic War Movies- The Story of G.I. Joe (1945)</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6389&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 08:20:35 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*THE STORY OF G.I. JOE* 
 
DIRECTED BY WILLIAM A. WELLMAN 
PRODUCED BY LESTER COWAN/ DAVID HALL 
LESTER COWAN PRODUCTIONS 
UNITED ARTISTS 
 
Image:...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="Navy">THE STORY OF G.I. JOE</font></font></b><br />
<br />
DIRECTED BY WILLIAM A. WELLMAN<br />
PRODUCED BY LESTER COWAN/ DAVID HALL<br />
LESTER COWAN PRODUCTIONS<br />
UNITED ARTISTS<br />
<br />
<a href="http://s27.photobucket.com/user/john-wayne/media/627_zps264926e9.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/627_zps264926e9.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />
<br />
Information from IMDb<br />
<br />
<b><u>Plot Summary</u></b><br />
War correspondent Ernie Pyle joins Company C, 18th Infantry as this American army unit<br />
 fights its way across North Africa in World War II. <br />
He comes to know the soldiers and finds much human interest material for his readers<br />
 back in the States. <br />
Later, he catches up with the unit in Italy and accompanies it through<br />
 the battles of San Vittorio and Cassino. <br />
He learns from its commanding officer, Lt. (later Capt.) Bill Walker<br />
 of the loneliness of command, and from the individual G.I.'s<br />
 of the human capacity to survive drudgery, discomfort, and the terror of combat. <br />
Written by Jim Beaver <br />
<br />
<b><u>Full Cast </u></b><br />
Burgess Meredith	... 	Ernie Pyle - Scripps-Howard War Correspondent<br />
Robert Mitchum	... 	Lt. Walker<br />
	Freddie Steele	... 	Sgt. Warnicki<br />
	Wally Cassell	... 	Pvt. Dondaro<br />
	Jimmy Lloyd	... 	Pvt. Spencer<br />
	John R. Reilly	... 	Pvt. Murphy (as John Reilly)<br />
	William Murphy	... 	Pvt. Mew (as Bill Murphy)<br />
	Sicily and Italy Combat Veterans of the Campaigns in Africa	... 	Themselves<br />
	William 'Billy' Benedict	... 	Pvt. Whitey (uncredited)<br />
	Michael Browne	... 	Sergeant (uncredited)<br />
Bob Hope	... 	Himself (voice on radio program) (voice) (uncredited)<br />
	Yolanda Lacca	... 	Amelia, Italian Girl (uncredited)<br />
	Tito Renaldo	... 	Lopez (uncredited)<br />
	Dick Rich	... 	Sergeant at Showers (uncredited)<br />
	William Self	... 	Pvt. Cookie Henderson (uncredited)<br />
	Nino Tempo	... 	Begging Child (uncredited)<br />
	Dorothy Coonan Wellman	... 	Nurse Lt. Elizabeth 'Red' Murphy (uncredited)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Writing Credits</u></b><br />
Leopold Atlas	 	(screenplay) &amp;<br />
Guy Endore	 	(screenplay) &amp;<br />
Philip Stevenson	 	(screenplay)<br />
Ben Bengal	 	additional dialogue (uncredited)<br />
Ernie Pyle	 	books &quot;Brave Men&quot; and &quot;Here Is Your War&quot; (uncredited)<br />
 <br />
<b><u>Original Music</u></b><br />
Louis Applebaum	 	<br />
Ann Ronell	 	<br />
 <br />
<b><u>Cinematography</u></b> <br />
Russell Metty	 	<br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
The extras in the film were real American GIs, in the process of being transferred from the war in Europe to the Pacific. Many of them were killed in the fighting on Okinawa - the same battle in which Ernie Pyle was killed by a Japanese machine gunner - never having seen the movie in which they appeared.<br />
<br />
William A. Wellman, nicknamed &quot;Wild Bill&quot;, was a fighter pilot in World War I and hated the infantry, and therefore had no interest in making a film about them. Producer Lester Cowan tried several times to convince Wellman to direct the film, including showing up uninvited at Christmas with gifts for Wellman's children. Wellman finally agreed to take the job only after meeting and spending several days with Ernie Pyle at Pyle's home in New Mexico, where he saw how much former infantrymen revered him.<br />
<br />
Several of the humorous lines spoken by G.I.s in the film are taken, uncredited, from WWII cartoonist Bill Mauldin's &quot;Willie and Joe&quot; characters.<br />
<br />
War correspondent Ernie Pyle acted as advisor to the film. Pyle was killed not long after the film was completed.<br />
<br />
Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower called this the finest war film he had ever seen. <br />
<br />
<b><u>Goofs</u></b><br />
<b>Continuity </b><br />
After 34 minutes a camouflaged M4 Sherman is seen firing. Moments later when the tank is hit and burns it has transformed into a non camouflaged M3 Lee. flagged M3 Lee.<br />
<br />
Crew or equipment visible <br />
When Ernie leaves his sleeping bag and other heavy gear before crossing a small stream, the shadows of the camera crew, boom mics, etc are clearly visible as he begins entering the water.<br />
<br />
In a night battle scene of US soldiers advancing, it is lit only by artillery explosions, a cameraman in visible in the middle distance pointing a hand=held camera back towards the men.<br />
<br />
<b>Factual errors </b><br />
The unit Pyle is with -the 18th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division- never fought in the Italian campaign. After the Sicilian campaign ended, it was brought back to England and began training for the D-Day invasion in Normandy. The 1st Division would eventually spearhead the assault on Omaha Beach.<br />
<br />
Much of this film revolves around the battles around Monte Cassino and the controversial bombing of the abbey, with several references to the monastery being used by the Germans as an observation post. Although the film acknowledges that the Germans used it as a defensive position after the bombing, it does not mention that the abbey had been unoccupied by the Germans and that the bombing was unnecessary. Given that this movie was filmed in 1945 while the war was still being fought, it is perhaps understandable that this fact was not mentioned.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0038120/trivia?tab=qt&amp;ref_=tt_trv_qu" target="_blank"><b><u>Memorable Quotes</u></b></a><br />
<br />
<b><u>Filming Location</u></b><br />
Selznick International Studios - 9336 Washington Blvd., Culver City, California, USA</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=52">Classic War Movies</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6389</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dunkirt w/ Sir John Mills. These are now mine..............</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6387&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 00:22:52 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>http://i.ebayimg.com/t/DUNKIRK-original-WW2-movie-publicity-photos-JOHN-MILLS-/00/$(KGrHqQOKkIE3r+Uh2CVBO!U)9jTwQ~~_3.JPG 
 
PS, yall NEED to go back...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><a href="http://i.ebayimg.com/t/DUNKIRK-original-WW2-movie-publicity-photos-JOHN-MILLS-/00/$(KGrHqQOKkIE3r+Uh2CVBO!U)9jTwQ~~_3.JPG" target="_blank">http://i.ebayimg.com/t/DUNKIRK-origi...)9jTwQ~~_3.JPG</a><br />
<br />
PS, yall NEED to go back to the other ways of posting pictures. This is harder to do and now sucks Prune Pits.</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11">Off Topic Discussions</category>
			<dc:creator>The Ringo Kid</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6387</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>(New Profile) Screen Legends- Bette Davis</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6386&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 10:37:16 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*BETTE DAVIS* 
 
Image: http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/220px-Bette_Davis_-_portrait_zps2cc87600.jpg ...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="Red">BETTE DAVIS</font></font></b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://s27.photobucket.com/user/john-wayne/media/220px-Bette_Davis_-_portrait_zps2cc87600.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/220px-Bette_Davis_-_portrait_zps2cc87600.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>..<a href="http://s27.photobucket.com/user/john-wayne/media/936full-bette-davis_zps00ace0f0.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/936full-bette-davis_zps00ace0f0.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />
<br />
Information from IMDb<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date of Birth</u></b><br />
5 April 1908, <br />
Lowell, Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date of Death</u></b><br />
6 October 1989, <br />
Neuilly-sur-Seine, Hauts-de-Seine, France (metastasized breast cancer)<br />
<br />
Birth Name<br />
Ruth Elizabeth Davis<br />
<br />
Nickname<br />
The Fifth Warner Brother<br />
The First Lady of Film<br />
<br />
Height<br />
5' 3&quot; (1.60 m) <br />
<br />
Spouse<br />
Gary Merrill 	(28 July 1950 - 6 July 1960) (divorced) 2 children<br />
William Grant Sherry 	(30 November 1945 - 5 July 1950) (divorced) 1 child<br />
Arthur Farnsworth 	(31 December 1940 - 25 August 1943) (his death)<br />
Harmon Nelson 	(18 August 1932 - 6 December 1938) (divorced)<br />
<br />
Trade Mark<br />
<br />
Often played assertive, uncompromising, aggressive and even ruthless women, though never less than compelling<br />
<br />
Her large, distinctive eyes<br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
While she was the star pupil at John Murray Anderson's Dramatic School in New York, another of her classmates was sent home because she was &quot;too shy&quot;. It was predicted that this girl would never make it as an actress. The girl was Lucille Ball.<br />
<br />
Ranked #15 in Empire (UK) magazine's &quot;The Top 100 Movie Stars of All Time&quot; list. [October 1997]<br />
<br />
In 1952 she was asked to perform in a musical, &quot;Two's Company&quot;. After several grueling months at rehearsals, her health deteriorated due to osteomyelitis of the jaw and she had to leave the show only several weeks after it opened. She was to repeat this process in 1974 when she rehearsed for the musical version of The Corn Is Green (1945), called &quot;Miss Moffat&quot;, but bowed out early in the run of the show for dubious medical reasons.<br />
<br />
On her sarcophagus is written &quot;She did it the hard way&quot;.<br />
<br />
She suffered a stroke and had a mastectomy in 1983.<br />
<br />
Attended Northfield Mt. Hermon high school.<br />
<br />
Interred at Forest Lawn (Hollywood Hills), Los Angeles, California, USA, just outside and to the left of the main entrance to the Court of Remembrance.<br />
<br />
Mother of Barbara Merrill (aka B.D. Hyman) and grandmother of J. Ashley Hyman. Marion Sherry was B.D.'s nanny until William Grant Sherry left Davis for her.<br />
<br />
Director Steven Spielberg won the Christie's auction of her 1938 Best Actress Oscar for Jezebel (1938) for $578,000. He then gave it to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. [19 July 2001]<br />
<br />
When Bette learned that her new brother-in-law was a recovering alcoholic, she sent the couple a dozen cases of liquor for a wedding present.<br />
<br />
She was elected as first female president of the American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences in October 1941. She resigned less then two months later, publicly declaring herself too busy to fulfill her duties as president while angrily protesting in private that the Academy had wanted her to serve as a mere figurehead.<br />
<br />
She considered her debut screen test for Universal Pictures to be so bad that she ran screaming from the projection room.<br />
<br />
Her third husband Arthur Farnsworth died after a fall on Hollywood Boulevard in which he took a blow to the head. He had shortly before banged his head on a train between LA and New England, followed by another fall down the stairway at their New Hampshire home.<br />
<br />
It is said that one of her real true loves was director William Wyler but he was married and refused to leave his wife.<br />
<br />
In Marked Woman (1937), Davis is forced to testify in court after being worked over by some Mafia hoods. Disgusted with the tiny bandage supplied by the makeup department, she left the set, had her own doctor bandage her face more realistically, and refused to shoot the scene any other way.<br />
<br />
When she first came to Hollywood as a contract player, Universal Pictures wanted to change her name to Bettina Dawes. She informed the studio that she refused to go through life with a name that sounded like &quot;Between the Drawers&quot;.<br />
<br />
Nominated for an Academy Award 5 years in a row, in 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943. She shares the record for most consecutive nominations with Greer Garson.<br />
<br />
After the song &quot;Bette Davis Eyes&quot; became a hit single, she wrote letters to singer Kim Carnes and songwriters Donna Weiss and Jackie DeShannon, asking how they knew so much about her. One of the reasons Davis loved the song is that her granddaughter heard it and thought it &quot;cool&quot; that her grandmother had a hit song written about her.<br />
<br />
While touring the talk show circuit to promote What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), she told one interviewer that when she and Joan Crawford were first suggested for the leads, Warner studio head Jack L. Warner replied: &quot;I wouldn't give a plugged nickel for either of those two old broads.&quot; Recalling the story, Davis laughed at her own expense. The following day, she reportedly received a telegram from Crawford: &quot;In future, please do not refer to me as an old broad!&quot;.<br />
<br />
Was one of two actresses (with Faye Dunaway) to have two villainous roles ranked in the American Film Institute's 100 Years of The Greatest Heroes and Villains, as Regina Giddens in The Little Foxes (1941) at #43 and as Baby Jane Hudson in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) at #44.<br />
<br />
Was named #2 on The Greatest Screen Legends actress list by the American Film Institute.<br />
<br />
She was voted the 10th Greatest Movie Star of all time by Entertainment Weekly.<br />
<br />
After her first picture, Davis was sitting outside the office of Universal Pictures executive Carl Laemmle Jr. when she overhead him say about her, &quot;She's got as much sex appeal as Slim Summerville. Who wants to get her at the end of the picture?&quot;.<br />
<br />
Attended Cushing Academy; a prep school in Ashburnham, Massachusetts. An award in her namesake is given annually to one male and one female scholar-athlete of exceptional accomplishment in both fields.<br />
<br />
Joan Crawford and Davis had feuded for years. During the making of What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), Bette had a Coca-Cola machine installed on the set due to Crawford's affiliation with Pepsi (she was the widow of Pepsi's CEO). Joan got her revenge by putting weights in her pockets when Davis had to drag her across the floor during certain scenes.<br />
<br />
Desperately wanted to win a third Best Actress Oscar for What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), as three wins in the leading category was unprecedented (Walter Brennan had won three Oscars, but all of his were in the supporting category). It was the general feeling among Academy voters that while Davis was superb, the movie itself was little better than a potboiler exploitation film, the kind that doesn't deserve the recognition that an Oscar would give it.<br />
<br />
Each of her four husbands were Gentiles, while her friend Joan Blondell's husband Michael Todd was Jewish. Blondell called Davis' brace of husbands the &quot;Four Skins.&quot;.<br />
<br />
According to her August 1982 Playboy Magazine interview, in her youth she posed nude for an artist, who carved a statue of her that was placed in a public spot in Boston, MA. After the interview appeared, Bostonians searched for the statue in vain.<br />
<br />
She came to Cardiff in 1975 for a theatre tour and went to the Welsh Valleys in search of relatives - and found them. She had been learning Welsh in order to come to Wales; however, she only used the words &quot;Nos Da&quot; (meaning &quot;good night&quot;) while in the country and had forgotten all the other phrases she had learned.<br />
<br />
She claimed to have given the Academy Award the nickname &quot;Oscar&quot; after her first husband, Harmon Nelson, whose middle name was Oscar, although she later withdrew that claim. Most sources say it was named by Academy librarian and eventual executive director Margaret Herrick, who thought the statuette resembled her Uncle Oscar.<br />
<br />
Murdoch University (Western Australia) Communications Senior Lecturer Tara Brabazon, in her article &quot;The Spectre of the Spinster: Bette Davis and the Epistemology of the Shelf,&quot; quotes the court testimony of Davis' first husband Harmon Nelson to show what a debacle her private life was. During divorce proceedings, Nelson was successful in sustaining his charge of mental cruelty by testifying that Davis had told him that her career was more important than her marriage. Brabazon writes that Davis, claiming she was beaten by all four of her husbands, believed that she should have remained single.<br />
<br />
She was voted the 25th Greatest Movie Star of all time by Premiere Magazine.<br />
<br />
In 1952, she accepted the Oscar for Best Actress in a Supporting Role on behalf of Kim Hunter, who wasn't present at the awards ceremony.<br />
<br />
Is one of the many movie stars mentioned in Madonna's song &quot;Vogue&quot;<br />
<br />
Is portrayed by Elissa Leeds in My Wicked, Wicked Ways: The Legend of Errol Flynn (1985) (TV).<br />
<br />
She said that among the jokes told about her, her favorite came from impressionist Charles Pierce who, dressed as her, demanded of the audience, &quot;Someone give me a cigarette&quot;. When the request was granted the performer threw it on the floor and shouted &quot;LIT!&quot;.<br />
<br />
For many years she was a popular target for impressionists but she was perplexed by the often used phrase &quot;Pee-tah! Pee-tah! Pee-tah!&quot;. She said she had no idea who Pee-tah was and had never even met anyone by that name.<br />
<br />
While filming Death on the Nile (1978), aboard ship, no one was allowed his or her own dressing room, so she shared a dressing room with Angela Lansbury &amp; Maggie Smith.<br />
<br />
Her performance as Margo Channing in All About Eve (1950) is ranked #5 on Premiere Magazine's 100 Greatest Performances of All Time (2006).<br />
<br />
Is portrayed by Nancy Linehan Charles in Norma Jean &amp; Marilyn (1996) (TV).<br />
<br />
Declined a role in 4 for Texas (1963) (which turned out to be a big hit) to do Dead Image (1964) (which turned out to be a big flop).<br />
<br />
Described the last three decades of her life as a &quot;my macabre period&quot;. She hated being alone at night and found growing older &quot;terrifying&quot;.<br />
<br />
Had a long-running feud with Miriam Hopkins due to her affair with Hopkins' husband, director Anatole Litvak, as well as Davis' getting many roles that Hopkins wanted.<br />
<br />
When she died, her false eyelashes were auctioned off, fetching a price of $600. Previously, she had said that her biggest secret was brown mascara.<br />
<br />
In an interview with Dick Cavett in 1971, she said her salary at the time she shot Jezebel (1938) was $650 a week.<br />
<br />
She was of English, French, and Welsh descent.<br />
<br />
Biography in: &quot;The Scribner Encyclopedia of American Lives&quot;. Volume Two, 1986-1990, pages 232-235. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1999.<br />
<br />
In Italian films, she was dubbed in most cases by Lidia Simoneschi or Andreina Pagnani. Occasionally, she was also dubbed by Tina Lattanzi, Giovanna Scotto, Rina Morelli or Wanda Tettoni.<br />
<br />
Was first offered the role of Luke's mother in Cool Hand Luke (1967), but refused the bit part. Jo Van Fleet accepted the role.<br />
<br />
Salary for 1941, $252,333.<br />
<br />
Salary for 1948, $365,000.<br />
<br />
During her great film career, she reportedly did not get along with her co-stars Miriam Hopkins, Susan Hayward, Celeste Holm and most infamously Joan Crawford.<br />
<br />
When she died in 1989, she reportedly left an estate valued between $600,000 and $1 million, consisting mainly of a condominium apartment she owned in West Hollywood. 50% of her estate went to her son, Michael Merrill, and the remaining 50% went to her secretary and companion, Kathryn Sermack. Her daughter, Barbara Merrill aka B.D. Hyman, was left nothing due to her lurid book about life with her mother. During her long life, she spent the majority of her wealth supporting her mother, three children, and four husbands.<br />
<br />
Played dual roles of twin sisters in two movies: A Stolen Life (1946) and Dead Image (1964).<br />
<br />
She was made a Fellow of the British Film Institute in recognition of her outstanding contribution to film culture.<br />
<br />
Pictured on a 42¢ USA commemorative postage stamp in the Legends of Hollywood series, issued 18 September 2008.<br />
<br />
In Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966), Elizabeth Taylor does an exaggerated impression of Bette Davis saying a line from Beyond the Forest (1949): &quot;What a dump!&quot; In an interview with Barbara Walters, Davis said that in &quot;Beyond the Forest&quot;, she really did not deliver the line in such an exaggerated manner. She said it in a more subtle, low-key manner, but it has passed into legend that she said it the way Elizabeth Taylor delivered it in &quot;Virginia Woolf&quot;. During the interview, the clip of Bette delivering the line in &quot;Beyond the Forest&quot; was shown to prove that she was correct. However, since people expected Bette Davis to deliver the line the way Taylor had in &quot;Virginia Woolf&quot;, she always opened her in-person, one woman show by saying the line in a campy, exaggerated manner: &quot;What... a... dump!!!&quot;. It always brought down the house. &quot;I imitated the imitators&quot;, Davis said.<br />
<br />
Her father was Harlow Morrell Davis, a lawyer. Her mother was Ruth Favor. She had a sister, Barbara Davis.<br />
<br />
Has a street named after her in Iowa City, Iowa.<br />
<br />
Bette Davis had been nominated for Best Actress in her film What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), which also starring Joan Crawford. If Bette had won, it would have set a record number of wins for an actress. According to the book &quot;Bette &amp; Joan - The Divine Feud&quot; by Shaun Considine, the two had a life long mutual hatred, and a jealous Joan Crawford actively campaigned against Bette Davis for winning Best Actress, and even told Anne Bancroft that if Anne won and was unable to accept the Award, Joan would be happy to accept it on her behalf. According to the book - and this may or may not be 100% true, but it makes a good anecdote - on Oscar night, Bette Davis was standing in the wings of the theatre waiting to hear the name of the winner. When it was announced that Anne Bancroft had won Best Actress for The Miracle Worker (1962), Bette Davis felt an icy hand on her shoulder as Joan Crawford said &quot;Excuse me, I have an Oscar to accept&quot;.<br />
<br />
Campaigned for the role of Ellie Andrews in It Happened One Night (1934), but the part was eventually given to Claudette Colbert, who went on to win a Best Actress Oscar for her performance.<br />
<br />
Campaigned for the part of Martha in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) but Elizabeth Taylor, who went on to win a Best Actress Oscar for her performance, was cast instead.<br />
<br />
Was originally offered the role of Sandra Kovak, the hot-tempered talented pianist, in The Great Lie (1941). However Davis declined, instead giving the part to her good friend Mary Astor in order to take on the less showier role of Maggie Patterson as she knew that it would make Astor, whose career had not fully recovered due to the transition from silent films to &quot;talkies&quot;, a huge star. Davis was right, as Astor went on to win the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her performance.<br />
<br />
For William Randolph Hearst's 75th birthday, the famous 'Circus Party' at San Simeon, she came dressed as a bearded lady (1937).<br />
<br />
Became pregnant by first husband Harmon Nelson in 1933 and 1936, by her lover William Wyler in 1940, and by her second husband Arthur Farnsworth in 1941, 1942 and 1943. On all of these occasions she had abortions.<br />
<br />
Was originally sought for the part of &quot;Shirley Drake&quot; in Career (1959).<br />
<br />
Onscreen, Bette Davis played spinsters named Charlotte in 3 different movies: &quot;The Old Maid&quot; (1939), &quot;Now, Voyager&quot; (1942), and &quot;Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte&quot; (1964).<br />
<br />
Returned to work three months after giving birth to her daughter Barbara Merrill in order to begin filming June Bride (1948).<br />
<br />
Played twin Sisters Kate and Patricia Bosworth in &quot;A Stolen Life (1946) and Margaret DeLorca and Edith Phillips in &quot;Dead Ringer (1964)&quot; In both she played a good and bad twin and, in both movies, one of the sisters met a tragic death.<br />
<br />
Was close friends with Greer Garson, Ginger Rogers, George Brent, Henry Fonda, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Ronald Reagan, Claude Rains, Olivia de Havilland and Gladys Cooper.<br />
<br />
Her role in &quot;The Petrified Forest&quot; got parodied in the cartoon &quot;She Was an Acrobat's Daughter&quot;. It depicts a movie called &quot;The Petrified Florist&quot;, starring Leslie Coward (a spoof of Leslie Howard) and Bette Savis.<br />
<br />
She was a lifelong liberal Democrat. She was a solid supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Adlai Stevenson, Lyndon Johnson, and Jimmy Carter. She was also a chairwoman for the Hollywood Democratic Committee and was an honored guest speaker at both the 1940/1944 Democratic National Convention.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Mini Biography</u></b><br />
Her parents divorced when she was young. In her first year of high school, she gave up dance for acting. After a little time in John Murray Anderson's acting school, she was in the off-Broadway play &quot;The Earth Between&quot; (1923). Her Broadway debut in 1929 was in &quot;Broken Dishes&quot;. Late in 1930, on a six-month Universal contract, she arrived in Hollywood. The studio representative who went to meet her train left without her because he could find no one who looked like a movie star. In 1932 she signed a seven-year deal with Warners. She won Oscars for Dangerous (1935) and Jezebel (1938) and fought unsuccessfully to break her contract between awards. She received eight additional Oscar nominations, including one for the role of Margo Channing in All About Eve (1950), the role with which she remains most identified. A genuine box-office star in the 1930s and 1940s, all her films from 1953 to 1962 lost money; then What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) brought a new phase of stardom. In 1979 she won a Best Actress Emmy for Strangers: The Story of a Mother and Daughter (1979) (TV), and in 1982 she moved from Connecticut to Los Angeles to be in the 1982-3 TV series &quot;Hotel&quot; (1983) (illness led to her replacement by Anne Baxter--shades of All About Eve (1950)!). She had three children, one of whom was severely retarded. Her daughter B.D. Hyman (AKA Barbara Merrill) wrote a 1985 torrid biography, &quot;My Mother's Keeper&quot;. In 1977 the American Film Institute gave her its Lifetime Achievement Award.<br />
IMDb Mini Biography By: Ed Stephan <br />
<br />
<b><u>Personal Quotes</u></b><br />
[when told by director Robert Aldrich that the studios wanted Joan Crawford as her co-star for Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964)] I wouldn't piss on Joan Crawford if she were on fire.<br />
<br />
[in 1982] Acting should be bigger than life. Scripts should be bigger than life. It should ALL be bigger than life.<br />
<br />
Getting old is not for sissies.<br />
<br />
I see - she's the original good time that was had by all.<br />
<br />
Until you're known in my profession as a monster, you're not a star.<br />
<br />
At 50, I thought proudly, 'Here we are, half century!' Being 60 was fairly frightening. You want to know how I spent my 70th birthday? I put on a completely black face, a fuzzy black afro wig, wore black clothes, and hung a black wreath on my door.<br />
<br />
I went back to work because someone had to pay for the groceries.<br />
<br />
I'm the nicest goddamn dame that ever lived.<br />
<br />
[on rival Joan Crawford] She has slept with every male star at MGM except Lassie.<br />
<br />
[on her character in All About Eve (1950)] Margo Channing was not a bitch. She was an actress who was getting older and was not too happy about it. And why should she be? Anyone who says that life begins at 40 is full of it. As people get older their bodies begin to decay. They get sick. They forget things. What's good about that?<br />
<br />
Gay Liberation? I ain't against it, it's just that there's nothing in it for me.<br />
<br />
Success only breeds a new goal.<br />
<br />
What a fool I was to come to Hollywood where they only understand platinum blondes and where legs are more important than talent.<br />
<br />
I have never known the great actor who... didn't plan eventually to direct or produce. If he has no such dream, he is usually bitter, ungratified and eventually alcoholic.<br />
<br />
There was more good acting at Hollywood parties than ever appeared on the screen.<br />
<br />
I would advise any woman against having an affair with a married man believing he will ever leave his wife, no matter how often he says his wife does not understand him. Love is not as necessary to a man's happiness as it is to a woman's. If her marriage is satisfactory, a woman will seldom stray. A man can be totally contented and still be out howling at the moon.<br />
<br />
The male ego, with few exceptions, is elephantine to start with.<br />
<br />
To fulfill a dream, to be allowed to sweat over lonely labor, to be given a chance to create, is the meat and potatoes of life. The money is the gravy.<br />
<br />
I'd marry again if I found a man who had fifteen million dollars, would sign over half to me, and guarantee that he'd be dead within a year.<br />
<br />
An affair now and then is good for a marriage. It adds spice, stops it from getting boring. I ought to know.<br />
<br />
[referring to her parents' divorce when she was 7] Of course I replaced my father. I became my own father and everyone else's.<br />
<br />
I will never be below the title.<br />
<br />
If you want a thing well done, get a couple of old broads to do it.<br />
<br />
Today everyone is a star - they're all billed as 'starring' or 'also starring'. In my day, we earned that recognition.<br />
<br />
[about Katharine Hepburn's tie for the 1968 Oscar with Barbra Streisand] I wanted to be the first to win three Oscars, but Miss Hepburn has done it. Actually it hasn't been done. Miss Hepburn only won half an Oscar. If they'd given me half an Oscar I would have thrown it back in their faces. You see, I'm an Aries. I never lose.<br />
<br />
[referring to her fourth husband, Gary Merrill] Gary was a macho man, but none of my husbands was ever man enough to become Mr. Bette Davis.<br />
<br />
[when told that &quot;at one time&quot; she had a reputation for being difficult] At one time?! I've been known as difficult for 50 years, practically! What do you mean &quot;at one time&quot;? Nooo, I've been like this for 50 years. And it's always always to make it the best film I can make it!<br />
<br />
Why am I so good at playing bitches? I think it's because I'm not a bitch. Maybe that's why [Joan Crawford] always plays ladies.<br />
<br />
[when told not to speak ill of the dead] Just because someone is dead does not mean they have changed!<br />
<br />
[on sex] God's biggest joke on human beings.<br />
<br />
[commenting on the death of long-time nemesis Joan Crawford] You should never say bad things about the dead, you should only say good . . . Joan Crawford is dead. Good.<br />
<br />
[commenting about her mother, an aspiring actress] I had to be the monster for both of us.<br />
<br />
If Hollywood didn't work out, I was prepared to be the best secretary in the world.<br />
<br />
I have been uncompromising, peppery, infractable, monomaniacal, tactless, volatile and offtimes disagreeable. I suppose I'm larger than life.<br />
<br />
[Joan Crawford] and I have never been warm friends. We are not simpatico. I admire her, and yet I feel uncomfortable with her. To me, she is the personification of the Movie Star. I have always felt her greatest performance is Crawford being Crawford.<br />
<br />
[after having blown the same line several times in Hollywood Canteen (1944), in which she plays herself] I don't know what's wrong with me, but I think I just can't play myself. I don't know how! But, if you give me a drink - give me a cigarette - give me a gun - I'll play any old bag you want me to. I just can't play myself!<br />
<br />
Beyond the Forest (1949) was a terrible movie! It had the longest death scene ever seen on the screen.<br />
<br />
I was a person who couldn't make divorce work. For me, there's nothing lonelier than a turned-down toilet seat.<br />
<br />
[before taking her final flight in 1989] I want to die with my high heels on, still in action.<br />
<br />
I always had the will to win. I felt it baking cookies. They had to be the best cookies anyone baked.<br />
<br />
When I die, they'll probably auction off my false eyelashes.<br />
<br />
My favorite person to work with was Claude Rains.<br />
<br />
<b>[on John Wayne] I certainly would have given anything to have worked with John Wayne. He's the most attractive man who ever walked the earth, I think.</b><br />
<br />
[on Errol Flynn] He was just beautiful . . . Errol. He himself openly said, &quot;I don't know really anything about acting,&quot; and I admire his honesty because he's absolutely right.<br />
<br />
[on director Lindsay Anderson] I think he's a very talented man, but I think he's a difficult man to work with. He really prefers theatre and not film, and that's a little depressing, I must say.<br />
<br />
[on Errol Flynn] He was not an actor of enormous talent -- he would have admitted that himself -- but in all those swashbuckling things he was beautiful.<br />
<br />
[in 1977, on why she was still working] So I am up to my ears in taxes and debts, and that's why I come out of my house in Connecticut every few years and work. I can hole up for just so long, then I gotta get out and stir things up again. It's half for income and half for me.<br />
<br />
[during tension on the set of The Whales of August (1987) about her esteemed costar Lillian Gish] She ought to know about close-ups! Jesus, she was around when they invented them!<br />
<br />
I think acting should look as if we were working a *little* ... It's like the juggler who loses it twice and then gets it, you know, finally. Which is a very old-fashioned theory today. See, you mustn't have *any* idea that *anybody* knows the camera's on them at all. You see: it's just life. Well, we all have life, 24, 12 hours a day, and sometimes we want to forget life, you know. And I think it should be a *little* larger than life. A little bit theatrical.<br />
<br />
[to TV interviewer Dick Cavett] People say, when I'm coming on with someone like you for ninety minutes, &quot;Don't you want to know what's going to happen?&quot; I *don't* want to know the questions ahead, because number one, I trust your taste, but if you should ask me something that I *really* don't want to go into, I'd give a *perfectly* nice smile, not insulting, and say, &quot;I don't want to talk about it.&quot; Nobody can *make* you talk about something. So if I'm *fool* enough to talk about it, then it's not your fault, it's mine. Like many bad interviews, this is what happens: it's the actor's fault. They get five good hookers in them, and tell their life story. Well, you cannot blame the interviewer who goes out and prints it. ... Anybody who does an interview with drinks is a fool. Because we all know we talk more with drinks.<br />
<br />
[of the studio executives] Four compliments a year, we never would have asked for so much money. Truthfully! They never knew it! Actors are complete suckers for good parts, you know, and just saying, &quot;You did a *good* job, Bette!&quot; Never. Never. Never.... I think it would've made a whole different salary scale in California, yes, I do. They only respected you by how much money you made. You could be the same actress at six-fifty a week or thirty thousand a week, and you're a *much* better actress at thirty thousand a week.<br />
<br />
[on being idolized and spoiled while traveling] This is *part* of the reward, but boy, you don't get that for a long time! And that must never be your motive. See that *can't* be the motive. Because that isn't what you want the most. You want to get on that stage and work.<br />
<br />
On work: This became a credo of mine...attempt the impossible in order to improve your work.<br />
<br />
On desire: From the moment I was six I felt sexy. And let me tell you it was hell, sheer hell, waiting to do something about it.<br />
<br />
On sexual politics: I am a woman meant for a man, but I never found a man who could compete.<br />
<br />
On growth: I have always been driven by some distant music -- a battle hymn no doubt -- for I have been at war from the beginning. I've never looked back before. I've never had the time and it has always seemed so dangerous. To look back is to relax one's vigil.<br />
<br />
On experience: Old age ain't no place for sissies.<br />
<br />
The weak are the most treacherous of us all. They come to the strong and drain them. They are bottomless. They are insatiable. They are always parched and always bitter. They are everyone's concern and like vampires they suck our life's blood.<br />
<br />
[on working with Joan Crawford in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)] We were polite to each other - all the social amenities, 'Good morning, Joan' and 'Good Morning, Bette' crap - and thank God we weren't playing roles where we had to like each other. But people forget that our big scenes were alone - just the camera was on me or her. No actresses on earth are as different as we are, all the way down the line. Yet what we do works. It's so strange, this acting business. It comes from inside. She was always so damn proper. She sent thank you notes for thank you notes. I screamed when I found out she signed autographs: 'Bless you, Joan Crawford.'<br />
<br />
You can't tell me that any man who has really loved a woman, or vice versa, can really be friends again after a divorce. And kidding about it is like tying a pink ribbon on a machine gun.<br />
<br />
[After hearing that Joan Crawford cried copiously over &quot;Dark Victory&quot;] Joan always cries a lot. Her tear ducts must be very close to her bladder.<br />
<br />
&quot;I am returning to the stage, to refine my craft.&quot; That's what Hollywood actors always say. But that's a bunch of BS. No one leaves movies for the stage unless they can't get work; and I'm no exception.<br />
<br />
[Of her longtime rival] We must hand it to her. Where she came from and all that--she accomplished *much*. She became a movie star, and I became the great actress. There is of course a need for both in this business, but you have to know *when* to put a stop to the nonsense that goes with the job. Stars are people *too*. They have to eat, sleep, and go to the bathroom too, without applause or a standing ovation. But I don't *think* Joan Crawford ever sleeps. She never *quits* being Joan Crawford. I find that tedious and quite insane.<br />
<br />
When I was filming Dangerous in 1935, I had a crush on my costar, Franchot Tone. Everything about him reflected his elegance, from his name to his manners. He had a great deal going for him, including Miss Joan Crawford.<br />
<br />
I don't take the movies seriously, and anyone who does is in for a headache.<br />
<br />
[on the making of Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964)]: I can't tell you what I went through during those weeks that shooting stopped, waiting for Crawford to get well. It was sheer torture.<br />
<br />
[on Joan Crawford]: I was not Miss Crawford's biggest fan, but, wisecracks to the contrary, I did and still do respect her talent. What she did not deserve was that detestable book written by her daughter. I've forgotten her name. Horrible. I looked at that book, but I did not need to read it. I wouldn't read trash like that, and I think it was a terrible, terrible thing for a daughter to do. An abomination! To do something like that to someone who saved you from the orphanage, foster homes, who knows what. If she didn't like the person who chose to be her mother, she was grown up and could choose her own life. I felt very sorry for Joan Crawford, but I knew she wouldn't appreciate my pity, because that's the last thing she would have wanted, anyone being sorry for her, especially me. I can understand how hurt Miss Crawford had to be. Well, no I can't. It's like trying to imagine how I would feel if my own beloved, wonderful daughter, B.D., were to write a bad book about me. Unimaginable. I am grateful for my children and for knowing they would never do to me anything like what Miss Crawford's daughter did to her. Of course, dear B.D., of whom I'm so proud, is my natural child, and there always are certain risks in adopting. Gary [Merrill] and I adopted two babies, because when we married I was too old to have our own. We were very pleased with our little boy, Michael, but our adopted daughter, who was a beautiful baby, was, brain-damaged. I never have had regrets, though, because I think we provided for her better than anything else that could have happened to her, and we gave her some happiness in her life. You can't return a baby like you can a carton of cracked eggs.<br />
<br />
[on Miriam Hopkins] Miriam is a perfectly charming person, socially. Working with her is another story. Miriam used, and I must give her credit, every trick in the book. I became fascinated watching them appear one by one. When she was supposed to be listening to me, her eyes would wander off into some world in which she was the sweetest of them all. Her restless little spirit was impatiently awaiting her next line, her golden curls quivering with expectancy. Miriam was her own worst enemy. I usually had better things to do than waste my energies on invective and cat fights.<br />
<br />
[on Greta Garbo] Oh, Garbo was divine. Soooo beautiful. I worshipped her. When I became a star, I used to have my chauffeur follow her in my car. I always wanted to meet her.<br />
<br />
[when asked if she and Joan Crawford were ever up for the same role] We were two different types entirely. I can't think of a single part I played that Joan could do. Not one. Can you?<br />
<br />
[on The Unforgiven (1960) Oh yes, I had a chance to go to Mexico, to play 'Burt Lancaster's mother. I turned it down. I'll be damned if I play Burt Lancaster's mother after thirty years in the business.<br />
<br />
[on Cool Hand Luke (1967)] Warner Brothers asked me to play Paul Newman's mother in Cool Hand Luke. They offered me $25,000 for one day's work. I said 'No.' I would have been on and off the screen in three minutes. That would be a cheat to the audience.<br />
<br />
Warner Brothers sent me a letter saying they wanted to use a clip from Now, Voyager (1942) in the Summer of '42 (1971). They implied that they wanted to use it as a laugh. My lawyer wrote back saying, if they wanted a clip to laugh at, why didn't they choose a scene from one of their current films.<br />
<br />
[Burnt Offerings (1976)] Karen Black changes her makeup in the middle of the scene, so nothing matches on the screen. She sleeps all day, never goes to rushes and you can't hear a bloody thing she says on the set. When I made movies you could hear me in a tunnel.<br />
<br />
[on Elizabeth Taylor's declining to have Davis as her co-star in A Little Night Music (1977)] She is such a fool. One would think that after all her years in the business she would want to work with a professional.<br />
<br />
[after attending President Jimmy Carter's 1977 inauguration] Miss Lillian [the President's mother] doesn't like any women. She was perfectly terrible to all of us at the inauguration. She only wanted to see the men. When any women came up to her, she just glared at us like this!<br />
<br />
[on her second husband, Arthur Farnsworth] Farney was a real charmer, but an alcoholic who was tied to his mother's apron strings... and what a mother. Christ, what a cold bitch.<br />
<br />
[on The Star (1952), (1983)] Oh, yes, that was [Joan] Crawford. I wasn't imitating her, of course. It was just that whole approach of hers to the business as regards the importance of glamor and all the off stage things. I adored the script.<br />
<br />
Salary<br />
Jezebel (1938) 	$650/week<br />
Dark Victory (1939) 	$3,500/week<br />
Juarez (1939) 	$4,000/week<br />
All About Eve (1950) 	$130,000<br />
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) 	$60,000 + 5% of the net profits.<br />
Where Love Has Gone (1964) 	$125,000<br />
Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964) 	$200,000<br />
Right of Way (1983) (TV) 	$250,000<br />
Wicked Stepmother (1989) 	$250,000<br />
<br />
<b><u><font size="3">Filmography</font></u></b><br />
<br />
1989 Wicked Stepmother...Miranda Pierpoint<br />
 1987 The Whales of August...Libby Strong<br />
 1986 As Summers Die (TV movie)...Hannah Loftin<br />
 1985 Murder with Mirrors (TV movie)...Carrie Louise Serrocold<br />
 1983 Right of Way (TV movie)...Mini Dwyer<br />
 1983 Hotel (TV series)– Hotel (1983) … Laura Trent<br />
 1982 Little Gloria... Happy at Last (TV movie)...Alice Gwynne Vanderbilt (as Betty Davis)<br />
 1982 A Piano for Mrs. Cimino (TV movie)...Esther McDonald Cimino<br />
 1981 Family Reunion (TV movie)...Elizabeth Winfield<br />
 1980 Skyward (TV movie)...Billie Dupree<br />
 1980 The Watcher in the Woods...Mrs. Aylwood<br />
 1980 White Mama (TV movie)...Adele Malone<br />
 1979 Strangers: The Story of a Mother and Daughter (TV movie)...Lucy Mason<br />
 1978 The Children of Sanchez...Woman (uncredited)<br />
 1978 Death on the Nile...Mrs. Van Schuyler<br />
 1978 Return from Witch Mountain...Letha<br />
 1978 The Dark Secret of Harvest Home (TV mini-series)...Widow Fortune<br />
 1977 Laugh-In (TV series)– Episode dated 5 November 1977 (1977) … Guest star<br />
 1976 The Disappearance of Aimee (TV movie)...Minnie Kennedy<br />
 1976 Burnt Offerings...Aunt Elizabeth<br />
 1974 Hello Mother, Goodbye! (TV movie)<br />
 1973 Scream, Pretty Peggy (TV movie)...Mrs. Elliott<br />
 1972 The Judge and Jake Wyler (TV movie)...Judge Meredith<br />
 1972 Lo scopone scientifico...The Millionairess<br />
 1972 Madame Sin...Madame Sin<br />
 1971 Bunny O'Hare...Bunny O'Hare<br />
 1970 Connecting Rooms...Wanda Fleming<br />
 1970 It Takes a Thief (TV series)– Touch of Magic (1970) … Bessie Grindel<br />
 1968 The Anniversary...Mrs. Taggart<br />
 1966 Gun Law (TV series)– The Jailer (1966) … Etta Stone (as Miss Bette Davis)<br />
 1965 The Nanny...Nanny<br />
 1964 Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte...Charlotte<br />
1964 Where Love Has Gone...Mrs. Gerald Hayden<br />
 1964 Dead Image...Margaret DeLorca/Edith Phillips<br />
 1963 La noia...Dino's mother<br />
 1963 Perry Mason (TV series)– The Case of Constant Doyle (1963) … Constant Doyle<br />
 1962 The Virginian (TV series)– The Accomplice (1962) … Celia Miller<br />
 1962 What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?...Baby Jane Hudson<br />
 1959-1961 Wagon Train (TV series)<br />
Bettina May / Ella Lindstrom / Madame Elizabeth McQueeny<br />
– The Bettina May Story (1961) … Bettina May<br />
– The Elizabeth McQueeny Story (1959) … Madame Elizabeth McQueeny<br />
– The Ella Lindstrom Story (1959) … Ella Lindstrom<br />
 1961 Pocketful of Miracles<br />
 1959 The DuPont Show with June Allyson (TV series)– Dark Morning (1959) … Sarah Whitney<br />
 1959 The Scapegoat...Countess<br />
 1959 John Paul Jones...Empress Catherine the Great<br />
 1959 Alfred Hitchcock Presents (TV series)– Out There - Darkness (1959) … Miss Fox<br />
 1958 Suspicion (TV series)– Fraction of a Second (1958) … Mrs. Wilfred Ellis<br />
 1957-1958 General Electric Theater (TV series)<br />
Christine Marlowe / Miss Burrows<br />
– The Cold Touch (1958) … Christine Marlowe<br />
– With Malice Toward One (1957) … Miss Burrows<br />
1958 Studio 57 (TV series)– The Starmaker (1958)<br />
 1957 Telephone Time (TV series)– Stranded (1957) … Beatrice Enter<br />
 1957 The Ford Television Theatre (TV series)– Footnote on a Doll (1957) … Dolley Madison<br />
 1957 Schlitz Playhouse of Stars (TV series)– For Better, for Worse (1957) … Irene Wagner<br />
 1956 Storm Centre...Alicia Hull<br />
 1956 Wedding Breakfast...Mrs. Agnes Hurley<br />
 1956 The 20th Century-Fox Hour (TV series)– Crack-Up (1956) … Marie Hoke<br />
 1955 The Virgin Queen...Queen Elizabeth I<br />
 1952 The Star...Margaret Elliot<br />
 1952 Four Star Revue (TV series)– Episode #2.33 (1952) … Guest Actress<br />
 1952 Phone Call from a Stranger...Marie Hoke<br />
 1951 Another Man's Poison...Janet Frobisher<br />
 1951 Payment on Demand<br />
Joyce Ramsey (nee Jackson)<br />
 1950 All About Eve...Margo<br />
 1949 Beyond the Forest...Rosa Moline<br />
 1948 June Bride...Linda Gilman<br />
 1948 Winter Meeting...Susan Grieve<br />
 1946 Deception...Christine Radcliffe<br />
 1946 A Stolen Life...Kate Bosworth/Patricia Bosworth<br />
 1945 The Corn Is Green...Miss Lilly Moffat<br />
 1944 Hollywood Canteen...Bette Davis<br />
 1944 Mr. Skeffington...Fanny Trellis Skeffington<br />
 1943 Old Acquaintance...Kit Marlowe<br />
 1943 Thank Your Lucky Stars...Bette Davis<br />
 1943 Watch on the Rhine...Sara Muller<br />
 1942 Now, Voyager...Charlotte Vale<br />
 1942 In This Our Life...Stanley Timberlake<br />
 1942 The Man Who Came to Dinner...Maggie Cutler<br />
 1941 The Little Foxes...Regina Giddens<br />
 1941 The Bride Came C.O.D....Joan Winfield<br />
 1941 Shining Victory...Nurse (uncredited)<br />
 1941 The Great Lie...Maggie Patterson Van Allen<br />
 1940 The Letter...Leslie Crosbie<br />
 1940 All This, and Heaven Too...Henriette Deluzy-Desportes<br />
 1940 If I Forget You (short)<br />
 1939 The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex...Queen Elizabeth<br />
 1939 The Old Maid...Charlotte Lovell<br />
 1939 Juarez...Carlota<br />
 1939 Dark Victory...Judith Traherne<br />
 1938 The Sisters...Louise Elliott Medlin<br />
 1938 Jezebel...Julie<br />
 1937 It's Love I'm After...Joyce Arden<br />
 1937 That Certain Woman...Mary Donnell<br />
 1937 Kid Galahad...Fluff<br />
 1937 Marked Woman...Mary<br />
 1936 Satan Met a Lady...Valerie Purvis<br />
 1936 The Golden Arrow...Daisy Appleby<br />
 1936 The Petrified Forest...Gabrielle Maple<br />
 1935 Dangerous...Joyce Heath<br />
 1935 Special Agent...Julie Gardner<br />
 1935 Front Page Woman...Ellen Garfield<br />
 1935 Men on Her Mind...Miriam A. Brady<br />
 1935 Bordertown...Marie Roark<br />
 1934 Housewife...Patricia Berkeley<br />
 1934 Of Human Bondage...Mildred<br />
 1934 Fog Over Frisco...Arlene Bradford<br />
 1934 Jimmy the Gent...Joan<br />
 1934 Fashions of 1934...Lynn<br />
 1934 The Big Shakedown...Norma Nelson<br />
 1933 Bureau of Missing Persons...Norma Roberts<br />
 1933 Ex-Lady...Helen Bauer<br />
 1933 The Working Man...Jenny<br />
 1933 Parachute Jumper...Patricia 'Alabama' Brent<br />
 1933 Just Around the Corner (short)...Ginger<br />
 1932 20,000 Years in Sing Sing...Fay Wilson<br />
 1932 Three on a Match...Ruth Wescott<br />
 1932 The Cabin in the Cotton...Madge<br />
 1932 The Dark Horse...Kay Russell<br />
 1932 The Rich Are Always with Us...Malbro<br />
 1932 So Big!...Miss Dallas O'Mara<br />
 1932 The Silent Voice...Grace Blair<br />
 1932 Hell's House...Peggy Gardner<br />
 1932 The Menace...Peggy Lowell<br />
 1931 Old Greatheart...Mary Lucy<br />
 1931 Waterloo Bridge...Janet Cronin<br />
 1931 Seed...Margaret Carter<br />
 1931 The Bad Sister...Laura Madison</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=64">Screen Legends</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6386</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>(New Review) Classic Movie Westerns- A Man Called Horse (1970)</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6385&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 10:08:33 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*A MAN CALLED HORSE* 
 
DIRECTED BY ELLIOT SILVERSTIEN 
PRODUCED BY FRANK BRILL/ SANDY HOWARD 
CINEMA CENTER FILMS 
 
Image:...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="Red">A MAN CALLED HORSE</font></font></b><br />
<br />
DIRECTED BY ELLIOT SILVERSTIEN<br />
PRODUCED BY FRANK BRILL/ SANDY HOWARD<br />
CINEMA CENTER FILMS<br />
<br />
<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/20745_7_zpsad695376.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
Information from IMDB<br />
<br />
<b><u>Plot Summary</u></b><br />
In 1825 an English aristocrat is captured by Indians. <br />
He lives with them and begins to understand/accept their lifestyles.<br />
 Eventually he is accepted as part of the tribe and becomes their leader. <br />
Written by Scott Lane <br />
<br />
<b><u>Full Cast</u></b><br />
Richard Harris	... 	John Morgan<br />
Judith Anderson	... 	Buffalo Cow Head (as Dame Judith Anderson)<br />
	Jean Gascon	... 	Batise<br />
	Manu Tupou	... 	Yellow Hand<br />
Corinna Tsopei	... 	Running Deer<br />
Dub Taylor	... 	Joe<br />
James Gammon	... 	Ed<br />
	William Jordan	... 	Bent<br />
	Eddie Little Sky	... 	Black Eagle<br />
	Michael Baseleon	... 	Longfoot<br />
	Lina Marín	... 	Thorn Rose (as Lina Marin)<br />
	Tamara Garina	... 	Elk Woman<br />
	Terry Leonard	... 	Striking Bear<br />
Iron Eyes Cody	... 	Medicine Man<br />
	Tom Tyon	... 	Medicine Man<br />
	Jackson Tail	... 	Medicine Man<br />
Manuel Padilla Jr.	... 	Leaping Buck<br />
	Lloyd One Star	... 	Warrior<br />
	James Never Miss a Shot	... 	Warrior<br />
	Frank Rabbit Jr.	... 	Warrior<br />
	Samuel White Horse	... 	Warrior<br />
	Justin Thin Elk	... 	Warrior<br />
	Lawrence Old Cross	... 	Warrior<br />
	Ardene Turning Bear	... 	Warrior<br />
	Aloysius Eagleman	... 	Warrior<br />
	Ross Kills Enemy	... 	Warrior<br />
	Ben Black Bear	... 	Warrior<br />
	Richard Fool Bull	... 	Warrior<br />
	Bruce Pretty Bird	... 	Warrior<br />
	Phillip Clark	... 	(uncredited)<br />
	Ben Eagleman	... 	(uncredited)<br />
	Lee Schaff Guardino	... 	Sioux Woman (voice) (uncredited)<br />
	Edward Little	... 	(uncredited)<br />
Sonny Skyhawk	... 	Member of the Yellow Hand Band (uncredited)<br />
	Vince St. Cyr	... 	Warrior (uncredited)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Writing Credits</u></b><br />
Jack DeWitt	 	(screenplay) (as Jack De Witt)<br />
Dorothy M. Johnson	 	(story)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Original Music </u></b><br />
Leonard Rosenman	 	<br />
 <br />
<b><u>Cinematography </u></b><br />
Robert B. Hauser	<br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
Based on a 1958 segment of the TV series Wagon Train, bearing the same title.<br />
<br />
Wagon Train 1957 The Man called Horse, it is the same story as this movie, <br />
with a few changes, even chief with two sisters, and a slave to Yellow Rope's mother.<br />
<br />
The story is based on Cabeza de Vaca's real life. <br />
A soldier from Spain that in 1528 suffered all that happens in this movie.  <br />
<br />
<b><u><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066049/trivia?tab=qt&amp;ref_=tt_trv_qu" target="_blank">Memorable Quotes</a></u></b><br />
<br />
<u><b>Filming Locations</b></u><br />
Custer State Park - 13329 U.S. Highway 16A, Custer, South Dakota, USA<br />
Durango, Mexico 	<br />
<br />
<b><u>Watch this Clip</u></b><br />
<br />
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qGu4Ycp655U"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qGu4Ycp655U" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object></div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=51">Classic Movie Westerns</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6385</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>(New Profile) Screen Legends- Gene Hackman</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6384&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 10:17:08 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*GENE HACKMAN* 
 
Image: http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/Gene_Hackman_zpsb3b2997a.jpg  
 
Information from IMDb 
 
*_Date of...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="DarkSlateBlue">GENE HACKMAN</font></font></b><br />
<br />
<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/Gene_Hackman_zpsb3b2997a.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
Information from IMDb<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date of Birth</u></b><br />
30 January 1930, <br />
San Bernardino, California, USA<br />
<br />
Birth Name<br />
Eugene Allen Hackman<br />
<br />
Height<br />
6' 2&quot; (1.88 m) <br />
<br />
Spouse<br />
Betsy Arakawa 	(December 1991 - present)<br />
Fay Maltese 	(1 January 1956 - 1986) (divorced) 3 children<br />
<br />
Trade Mark<br />
<br />
Raspy voice<br />
<br />
Prefers to come to a role with minimal rehearsal<br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
Was the first choice to play Mike Brady on &quot;The Brady Bunch&quot; (1969).<br />
<br />
He was the sixth choice to play Popeye Doyle in The French Connection (1971).<br />
<br />
He lied about his age to join the Marines at 16, but left as soon as his initial tour was complete.<br />
<br />
While at the Pasadena Playhouse, Hackman and a classmate were voted &quot;Least likely to succeed&quot;. The classmate was Dustin Hoffman.<br />
<br />
Was the first choice to play Hannibal Lector in The Silence of the Lambs (1991).<br />
<br />
Was also offered the chance to direct The Silence of the Lambs (1991).<br />
<br />
Turned down the part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in Pearl Harbor (2001), which went to Jon Voight.<br />
<br />
Jailed as a teen (c. 1946) for stealing candy &amp; soda pop from a candy store.<br />
<br />
One of the most sustaining actors of all time, he still averaged two films a year in his 70s, having starred in six in 2001 alone. This all changed however in 2004, when he last acted in Welcome to Mooseport (2004). He has not appeared in anything since.<br />
<br />
Has stated that his performance in Scarecrow (1973) is his personal favorite.<br />
<br />
Revealed on &quot;Inside the Actors Studio&quot; (1994) that two of the most important factors in deciding on which films he will work on are the script and the money.<br />
<br />
2001: Was involved in a road-rage incident when two young men attacked him for hitting their car in Hollywood.<br />
<br />
Father of Christopher Hackman. He also has 2 daughters named Leslie Hackman and Elizabeth Hackman.<br />
<br />
Brother of Richard Hackman.<br />
<br />
Has appeared in three films adapted from novels by John Grisham: The Firm (1993), The Chamber (1996) and Runaway Jury (2003).<br />
<br />
Based his role, in The Conversation (1974), on one of his uncles and a fellow Marine he had known well. He characterized the Marine as someone &quot;who probably became a serial killer&quot;.<br />
<br />
Dustin Hoffman came to New York after finishing his training at the Pasadena Playhouse. The two of them roomed together in New York at Hackman's one-bedroom apartment on 2nd Ave. &amp; 26th St. Hoffman slept on the kitchen floor. Originally, Hackman had offered to let him stay a few nights, but Hoffman would not leave. Hackman had to take him out to look for his own apartment.<br />
<br />
As roommates, Dustin Hoffman and Hackman would often go to the apartment rooftop and play the drums. Hoffman played the bongo drums while Hackman played the conga drums. They did it out of their love for Marlon Brando, who they had heard played music in clubs. They wanted to be like Brando and were big fans of his.<br />
<br />
Dustin Hoffman asked for the part of Rankin Fitch in Runaway Jury (2003), which had gone to Hackman. Hoffman admits to asking, &quot;Can't you get rid of Gene and give me the part?&quot;.<br />
<br />
Runaway Jury (2003) was the first time he and former roommate Dustin Hoffman performed on the screen together.<br />
<br />
Met actor Dustin Hoffman in the first month at Pasadena Playhouse. Had several classes with him.<br />
<br />
Was admitted into the famed Pasadena Playhouse on the G.I. Bill. He failed out of it after 3 months and moved to New York to continue being a stage actor. Received 1 of the lowest grades the school had ever given (1.3 out of 10). He headed to New York with the intention of proving them wrong.<br />
<br />
Was the subject of the song &quot;Gene Hackman&quot; by Hoodoo Gurus.<br />
<br />
Turned down the lead roles in Jaws (1975), Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977), and Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981).<br />
<br />
7/7/04: Appeared on &quot;Larry King Live&quot; (1985). Larry King was surprised to find out that Hackman had no movies lined up, and Hackman replied by saying that he thinks it is the end of his career.<br />
<br />
Says watching his own films makes him terribly nervous.<br />
<br />
Reportedly turned down the role of Randall Patrick McMurphy in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975).<br />
<br />
Reportedly turned down one of the lead roles in Network (1976).<br />
<br />
After he played Little Bill in Unforgiven (1992), Hackman vowed not to appear in any more violent films. After he had been in violent films dating back to Bonnie and Clyde (1967) and The French Connection (1971) (in a role refused by Peter Boyle for the same reasons), he said he was fed up with them.<br />
<br />
Along with Margot Kidder, Hackman was appalled at the way Alexander Salkind and Ilya Salkind, the producers of the first three Superman films and 1984's Supergirl (1984) film, had treated director Richard Donner, who had directed the first Superman (1978) and most of the second Superman film back-to-back before he was fired by the Salkinds over creative differences. Hackman, who said he only did the first two movies because of Donner's persuasion, was so angry with the Salkinds that he vehemently refused to reprise the role of Lex Luthor in Superman III (1983), while Margot Kidder, who played Lois Lane, only appeared in a cameo role. Hackman was later persuaded to reprise the Luthor role in Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987).<br />
<br />
Enjoys painting and writing fiction.<br />
<br />
Lives in Santa Fe, New Mexico.<br />
<br />
As a young man, Hackman attended a showing of the movie A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) and was impressed by the performance of Marlon Brando due to his naturalism and the fact that he didn't look like what a movie star typically looked like in the 1950s. After exiting the theater, he told his father that he wanted to be an actor.<br />
<br />
Even though he is no longer a cigarette smoker, Hackman played the role of a chain-smoker in Heartbreakers (2001). He was using a special kind of cigarette that only produces heavy smoke without requiring any inhaling. Ironically and tragically, in 1962, Hackman's mother Lydia died of injuries incurred from a fire caused by her own smoking.<br />
<br />
Turned down the lead role of Roy Neary in Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) because he was in a troubled marriage and could not spend 16 weeks outside of Los Angeles on location shooting.<br />
<br />
In a 2004 Vanity Fair story on him, Dustin Hoffman, and Robert Duvall, Hackman said one of the worst memories of being a struggling actor, was working as a doorman in New York City. He recalled having seen former Marine officers pass him by when opening the door for them, of which one had said &quot;Hackman, you're a sorry son of a bitch.&quot;<br />
<br />
While a struggling actor in New York City, he worked as a soda jerk in a pharmacy and as a furniture mover. But told Time Magazine in 2011 that &quot;worst job I ever had&quot; was working nights at the legendary Chrysler Building--as part of a crew that polished the leather furniture.<br />
<br />
After flunking out of the Pasadena Playhouse and moving to New York City with fellow drop-out Dustin Hoffman, Hackman worked at the Howard Johnson's restaurant in Times Square as a doorman. One day, a Pasadena Playhouse acting teacher whom Hackman hated walked by him, stopped, and told him that he had been right, that Hackman would never amount to anything.<br />
<br />
In Robert Osborne's &quot;Academy Awards 1972 Oscar Annual&quot;, Hackman is quoted as saying Errol Flynn was his boyhood idol. Says a poster of Flynn is one of the only movie mementos he has in his otherwise very &quot;civilian&quot; Santa Fe home.<br />
<br />
1990: Underwent successful angioplasty surgery after nearly suffering a severe heart attack.<br />
<br />
Is one of only a few actors to win an Oscar for a supporting role after winning an Oscar for a leading role. (Others to do so are Jack Nicholson, Maggie Smith and Helen Hayes).<br />
<br />
In the Superman movies, he didn't like the idea of going bald for his role as Lex Luthor. He was allowed to wear wigs instead, and was convinced to wear a bald cap in only a few scenes.<br />
<br />
Has played three fictional Presidents: he plays President Alan Richmand in Absolute Power (1997). His Superman (1978) character, Lex Luthor, became President of the United States in the year 2000, in the DC Comics. He also played President Monroe &quot;Eagle&quot; Cole in Welcome to Mooseport (2004).<br />
<br />
Hackman replaced George Segal in the role of Kibby in the notorious flop Lucky Lady (1975). Possibly anticipating that the film would be a turkey, Segal bailed out of the production and Hackman was brought in at the last-minute. The desperate producers paid Hackman - riding high from the huge box office success of The Poseidon Adventure (1972)--a reported $1.2 million for his role, $500,000 more than Segal's going rate. Hackman knew co-star Burt Reynolds from starring in the first episode of Burt's short-lived 1966 TV series &quot;Hawk&quot; (1966).<br />
<br />
His performance as Harry Caul in The Conversation (1974) is ranked #37 on Premiere Magazine's 100 Greatest Performances of All Time (2006).<br />
<br />
Hackman has said that the failure of Scarecrow (1973) turned him off of art films due to the disappointment of working hard on a film that was critically acclaimed, but that tanked at the box office and failed to garner any awards. After this flop, Hackman mainly concentrated on acting for money, turning down such films as One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) and Network (1976) for roles in films like March or Die (1977) and Lucky Lady (1975) that offered him fatter paychecks.<br />
<br />
Appeared on Richard Nixon's infamous &quot;List of Enemies&quot; during the 1972 presidential election, the only time Hackman was publicly involved in politics. During an interview on &quot;Larry King Live&quot; (1985) in July 2004, Hackman stated that although he is a Democrat, he liked President Ronald Reagan, who had died the previous year.<br />
<br />
Before he decided to become an actor, he worked numerous jobs including announcing at small radio and TV stations.<br />
<br />
Studied journalism and TV production at the University of Illinois, where he was voted &quot;Least Likely to Succeed.&quot;.<br />
<br />
Was a Dallas Cowboys fan but now regularly attends Jacksonville Jaguars games as a guest of his friend, head coach Jack Del Rio.<br />
<br />
In contrast with his on-screen image of tough guy and reactionary, in real life Hackman is said to be an extremely gentle, shy person who holds very progressive political views.<br />
<br />
Turned down the role of Sheriff Teasle in First Blood (1982).<br />
<br />
Friends with Kris Kristofferson since Cisco Pike (1972).<br />
<br />
Turned down the leading role in Sorcerer (1977) that went to Roy Scheider, Hackman's co-star in The French Connection (1971).<br />
<br />
Both Hackman and his former roommate, Dustin Hoffman, had their big breaks in 1967, Hackman in Bonnie and Clyde (1967) and Hoffman in The Graduate (1967).<br />
<br />
Distantly related to Jenni Blong.<br />
<br />
Released his novel, a violent Western, &quot;Payback at Morning Peak&quot; in June, 2011.<br />
<br />
In the late 1970s, he competed in Sports Car Club of America races driving open-wheeled Formula Ford. In 1983, he drove in a 24-hour Daytona endurance race. He has also won the Long Beach Grand Prix Celebrity Race.<br />
<br />
Is one of only four actors to win two Oscars for films that also won Best Picture (the others being Marlon Brando, Jack Nicholson, and Dustin Hoffman).<br />
<br />
<b><u>Mini Biography</u></b><br />
The son of Eugene Ezra Hackman and Lydia (nee Gray), Gene Hackman grew up in a broken home, which he left at the age of 16 for a hitch with the US Marines. Moving to New York after being discharged, he worked in a number of menial jobs before studying journalism and television production on the G.I. Bill at the University of Illinois. Hackman would be over 30 years old when he finally decided to take his chance at acting by enrolling at the Pasadena Playhouse in California. Legend says that Hackman and friend Dustin Hoffman were voted &quot;least likely to succeed.&quot;<br />
<br />
Hackman next moved back to New York, where he worked in summer stock and off-Broadway. In 1964 he was cast as the young suitor in the Broadway play &quot;Any Wednesday.&quot; This role would lead to him being cast in the small role of Norman in Lilith (1964), starring Warren Beatty. When Beatty was casting for Bonnie and Clyde (1967), he cast Hackman as Buck Barrow, Clyde Barrow's brother. That role earned Hackman a nomination for the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor, an award for which he would again be nominated in I Never Sang for My Father (1970). In 1972 he won the Oscar for his role as Detective Jimmy &quot;Popeye&quot; Doyle in The French Connection (1971). At 40 years old Hackman was a Hollywood star whose work would rise to new heights with Night Moves (1975) and Bite the Bullet (1975), or fall to new depths with The Poseidon Adventure (1972) and Eureka (1983). Hackman is a versatile actor who can play comedy (the blind man in Young Frankenstein (1974)) or villainy (the evil Lex Luthor in Superman (1978)). He is the doctor who puts his work above people in Extreme Measures (1996) and the captain on the edge of nuclear destruction in Crimson Tide (1995). After initially turning down the role of Little Bill Daggett in Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven (1992), Hackman finally accepted it, as its different slant on the western interested him. For his performance he won the Oscar and Golden Globe and decided that he wasn't tired of westerns after all. He has since appeared in Geronimo: An American Legend (1993), Wyatt Earp (1994), and The Quick and the Dead (1995).<br />
IMDb Mini Biography By: Tony Fontana <br />
<br />
<b><u>Personal Quotes</u></b><br />
I was trained to be an actor, not a star. I was trained to play roles, not to deal with fame and agents and lawyers and the press.<br />
<br />
[on aging] It really costs me a lot emotionally to watch myself on-screen. I think of myself, and feel like I'm quite young, and then I look at this old man with the baggy chins and the tired eyes and the receding hairline and all that.<br />
<br />
[Dustin Hoffman on him and Hackman as young stage actors and roommates in New York] Psychologically, Gene/myself, we did not think about making it in the terms that people think about. We fully expected to be failures for our entire life. Meaning that we would always be scrambling to get a part. We were actors. We had no pretensions. There was more dignity in being unsuccessful.<br />
<br />
[on accepting his Best Actor Oscar] I wish all five of us could be up here, I really do.<br />
<br />
If I start to become a &quot;star&quot;, I'll lose contact with the normal guys I play best.<br />
<br />
I came to New York when I was 25, and I worked at Howard Johnson's in Times Square, where I did the door in this completely silly uniform. Before that, I had been a student at the Pasadena Playhouse, where I had been awarded the least-likely-to-succeed prize, along with my pal Dustin Hoffman, which was a big reason we set off for New York together. Out of nowhere, this teacher I totally despised at the Pasadena Playhouse suddenly walked by HoJo's and came right up into my face and shouted, &quot;See, Hackman, I told you that you would never amount to anything!&quot; I felt one inch tall.<br />
<br />
[on seeing Marlon Brando in A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) and becoming determined to be an actor] He made it seem something natural.<br />
<br />
I wanted to act, but I'd always been convinced that actors had to be handsome. That came from the days when Errol Flynn was my idol. I'd come out of a theater and be startled when I looked in a mirror because I didn't look like Flynn. I felt like him.<br />
<br />
I suppose I wanted to be an actor from the time I was about 10, maybe even younger than that. Recollections of early movies that I had seen and actors that I admired like James Cagney, Errol Flynn, those kind of romantic action guys. When I saw those actors, I felt I could do that. But I was in New York for about eight years before I had a job. I sold ladies shoes, polished leather furniture, drove a truck. I think that if you have it in you and you want it bad enough, you can do it.<br />
<br />
The difference between a hero and a coward is one step sideways.<br />
<br />
Dysfunctional families have sired a number of pretty good actors.<br />
<br />
People in the street still call me Popeye, and The French Connection (1971) was 15 years ago. I wish I could have a new hit and another nickname.<br />
<br />
When you're on top, you get a sense of immortality. You feel you can do no wrong, that it will always be good no matter what the role. Well, in truth, that feeling is death. You must be honest with yourself.<br />
<br />
I haven't held a press conference to announce retirement, but yes, I'm not going to act any longer. I've been told not to say that over the last few years, in case some real wonderful part comes up, but I really don't want to do it any longer ... I miss the actual acting part of it, as it's what I did for almost fifty years, and I really loved that. But the business for me is very stressful. The compromises that you have to make in films are just part of the beast, and it had gotten to a point where I just didn't feel like I wanted to do it anymore.<br />
<br />
[In a 2011 GQ interview, when asked if he would ever come out of retirement and make another film] I don't know. If I could do it in my own house, maybe, without them disturbing anything and just one or two people.<br />
<br />
[on making The French Connection (1971)] I found out very quickly that I am not a violent person. And these cops are surrounded by violence all the time. There were a couple of days when I wanted to get out of the picture.<br />
<br />
(2011, on how he'd like to be remembered) As a decent actor. As someone who tried to portray what was given to them in an honest fashion. I don't know, beyond that. I don't think about that often, to be honest. I'm at an age where I should think about it.<br />
<br />
(2011, on where he keeps his Oscars) You know, I'm not sure; I don't have any memorabilia around the house. There isn't any movie stuff except a poster downstairs next to the pool table of Errol Flynn from Dawn Patrol. I'm not a sentimental guy.<br />
<br />
(2011, on Best Shot (1986)) I took the film at a time that I was desperate for money. I took it for all the wrong reasons, and it turned out to be one of those films that stick around. I was from that area of the country and knew of that event, strangely enough. We filmed fifty miles from where I was brought up. So it was a bizarre feeling. I never expected the film to have the kind of legs it's had.<br />
<br />
I'm disappointed that success hasn't been a Himalayan feeling.<br />
<br />
Salary<br />
The French Connection (1971) 	$100,000<br />
Lucky Lady (1975) 	$1,250,000<br />
Superman (1978) 	$2,000,000<br />
The Quick and the Dead (1995) 	$1,300,000<br />
<br />
<b><u><font size="3">Filmography</font></u></b><br />
<br />
2004 Welcome to Mooseport...Monroe Cole<br />
 2003 Runaway Jury...Rankin Fitch<br />
 2001 Behind Enemy Lines...Admiral Leslie McMahon Reigart<br />
 2001 The Royal Tenenbaums...Royal Tenenbaum<br />
 2001 Heist...Joe Moore<br />
 2001 Heartbreakers...William B. Tensy<br />
 2001 The Mexican...Arnold Margolese (uncredited)<br />
 2000 The Replacements...Jimmy McGinty<br />
 2000 Under Suspicion...Henry Hearst<br />
 1998 Enemy of the State...Edward Lyle<br />
 1998 Antz...General Mandible (voice)<br />
 1998 Twilight...Jack Ames<br />
 1997 Absolute Power...President Allen Richmond<br />
 1996 The Chamber...Sam Cayhall<br />
 1996 Extreme Measures...Dr. Lawrence Myrick<br />
 1996 The Birdcage...Sen. Kevin Keeley <br />
1995 Get Shorty...Harry Zimm<br />
 1995 Crimson Tide...Capt. Frank Ramsey<br />
 1995 The Quick and the Dead...Herod<br />
 1994 Wyatt Earp...Nicholas Earp<br />
 1993 Geronimo: An American Legend...Brig. Gen. George Crook<br />
 1993 The Firm...Avery Tolar<br />
 1992 Unforgiven...Little Bill Daggett<br />
 1991 Company Business...Sam Boyd<br />
 1991 Class Action...Jedediah Tucker Ward<br />
 1990 Narrow Margin...Caulfield<br />
 1990 Postcards from the Edge...Lowell Kolchek<br />
 1990 Loose Cannons...MacArthur Stern<br />
 1989 The Package...Sgt. Johnny Gallagher<br />
 1988 Mississippi Burning...Agent Rupert Anderson<br />
 1988 Full Moon in Blue Water...Floyd<br />
 1988 Split Decisions...Dan McGuinn<br />
 1988 Another Woman...Larry Lewis<br />
 1988 Bat*21...Lt. Col. Iceal Hambleton<br />
 1987 No Way Out...Defense Secretary David Brice<br />
 1987 Superman IV: The Quest for Peace...Lex Luthor (voice) / Nuclear Man (voice)<br />
 1986 Best Shot...Coach Norman Dale<br />
 1986 Power...Wilfred Buckley<br />
 1985 Target...Walter Lloyd/Duncan (Duke) Potter<br />
 1985 Twice in a Lifetime...Harry MacKenzie<br />
 1984 Misunderstood...Ned Rawley<br />
 1983 Uncommon Valor...Col. Cal Rhodes<br />
 1983 Two of a Kind...God (voice) (uncredited)<br />
 1983 Under Fire...Alex Grazier<br />
 1983 Eureka...Jack McCann<br />
 1981 Reds...Pete Van Wherry<br />
 1981 All Night Long...George Dupler<br />
 1980 Superman II...Lex Luthor<br />
 1978 Superman...Lex Luthor<br />
 1977 March or Die...Maj. William Sherman Foster<br />
 1977 A Bridge Too Far...Major General Sosabowski<br />
 1977 The Domino Killings...Roy Tucker<br />
 1975 Lucky Lady...Kibby Womack<br />
 1975 Bite the Bullet...Sam Clayton<br />
 1975 Night Moves...Harry Moseby<br />
 1975 French Connection II...Doyle<br />
 1974 Young Frankenstein...Blindman<br />
 1974 Zandy's Bride...Zandy Allan<br />
 1974 The Conversation...Harry Caul<br />
 1973 Scarecrow...Max Millan<br />
 1972 The Poseidon Adventure...Reverend Scott<br />
 1972 Prime Cut...Mary Ann<br />
 1972 Cisco Pike...Officer Leo Holland<br />
 1971 The French Connection...Jimmy Doyle<br />
 1971 The Hunting Party...Brandt Ruger<br />
 1971 Doctors' Wives...Dr. Dave Randolph<br />
 1970 I Never Sang for My Father...Gene Garrison<br />
 1970 Insight (TV series)&#8211; Confrontation (1970) &#8230; Holt<br />
 1969 Marooned...Buzz Lloyd<br />
 1969 Downhill Racer...Eugene Claire<br />
 1969 The Gypsy Moths...Joe Browdy<br />
 1969 Riot...Red Fraker<br />
 1968 Shadow on the Land (TV movie)...Rev. Thomas Davis<br />
 1968 The Split...Detective Lt. Walter Brill<br />
 1968 I Spy (TV series)&#8211; Happy Birthday Everybody (1968) &#8230; Frank Hunter<br />
 1968 CBS Playhouse (TV series)&#8211; My Father and My Mother (1968) &#8230; Ned<br />
 1967 Iron Horse (TV series)&#8211; Leopards Try, But Leopards Can't (1967) &#8230; Harry Wadsworth<br />
 1967 The Invaders (TV series)&#8211; The Spores (1967) &#8230; Tom Jessup<br />
 1967 Bonnie and Clyde...Buck Barrow<br />
 1967 Banning...Tommy Del Gaddo<br />
 1967 Community Shelter Planning (short)...Donald Ross - Regional Civil Defense Officer<br />
 1967 A Covenant with Death...Harmsworth<br />
 1967 First to Fight...Sgt. Tweed<br />
 1967 The F.B.I. (TV series)&#8211; The Courier (1967) &#8230; Herb Kenyon<br />
 1966 Hawaii...Dr. John Whipple<br />
 1966 Hawk (TV series)&#8211; Do Not Mutilate or Spindle (1966) &#8230; Houston Worth<br />
 1966 The Trials of O'Brien (TV series)&#8211; The Only Game in Town (1966) &#8230; Roger Nathan<br />
 1964 Lilith...Norman<br />
 1959-1964 Brenner (TV series)<br />
&#8211; Laney's Boy (1964) &#8230; Police Officer in Squad Room (uncredited)<br />
&#8211; The Bluff (1959)<br />
 1963 East Side/West Side (TV series)- Creeps Live Here (1963) &#8230; Police Officer<br />
 1963 Ride with Terror (TV movie)<br />
 1963 The DuPont Show of the Week (TV series)&#8211; Ride with Terror (1963) &#8230; Douglas McCann<br />
 1963 Route 66 (TV series)&#8211; Who Will Cheer My Bonnie Bride (1963) &#8230; Motorist<br />
 1961-1963 The Defenders (TV series)<br />
Guard / Jerry Warner<br />
&#8211; Judgment Eve (1963) &#8230; Guard<br />
&#8211; Death Across the Counter (1961)<br />
&#8211; Quality of Mercy (1961) &#8230; Jerry Warner<br />
 1963 Naked City (TV series)r&#8211; Prime of Life (1963) &#8230; Mr. Jasper<br />
 1963 Look Up and Live (TV series)&#8211; The End of the Story (1963) &#8230; Frank Collins<br />
 1959-1962 The United States Steel Hour (TV series)<br />
Ed / Joey Carlton / Reverend MacCreighton / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; Far from the Shade Tree (1962) &#8230; Ed<br />
&#8211; Bride of the Fox (1960)<br />
&#8211; Big Doc's Girl (1959) &#8230; Reverend MacCreighton<br />
&#8211; The Pink Burro (1959) &#8230; Steve<br />
&#8211; Little Tin God (1959) &#8230; Joey Carlton<br />
 1961 Tallahassee 7000 (TV series)&#8211; The Fugitive (1961) &#8230; Joe Lawson<br />
 1961 Mad Dog Coll...Cop (uncredited)</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=64">Screen Legends</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6384</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Post Counts</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6383&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 18:01:29 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[Please take note of Kevin's post in the  
*Forum Upgrade (http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6343)* thread, as it affects all our post counts....]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>Please take note of Kevin's post in the <br />
<b><a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6343" target="_blank">Forum Upgrade</a></b> thread, as it affects all our post counts.<br />
<br />
You will all notice that all members posts are now counted down.<br />
Please see below<br />
<div class="bbcode_container">
	<div class="bbcode_description">Quote:</div>
	<div class="bbcode_quote printable">
		<hr />
		
			<div>
				Originally Posted by <strong>Kevin</strong>
				<a href="showthread.php?p=128995#post128995" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="images/buttons/viewpost.gif" alt="View Post" /></a>
			</div>
			<div class="message">Nobody shoot me, but it appears that the forum had inaccurate post counts. I ran the &quot;Update Post Counts&quot; tool to correct the inflated post numbers, but it appears now that everyone lost posts. I'm thinking that the reason is that when the Update Post Counts tool runs it checks the database for posts for each member, if the post count is different than what is actually in the database then it updates the post count to match the actual number. If you post and you or the mod team removes your post the system wouldn't remove your delete post count. So overtime, your account will show a post count higher than what is acutally in the database. It didn't hit me until I ran the tool.<br />
<br />
So get the firing squad, I have the cigarette in mouth, and my eyes are covered. :embaressed_smile:</div>
			
		<hr />
	</div>
</div> It now means many Congratulations made in the  1000+ Post Club etc.<br />
will now be incorrect.<br />
Its is probably  best therefore, to forget what was before,<br />
and start a fresh from today, when applauding new milestones.</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=10">Board news and announcements</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6383</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>(New Review) Classic War Movies- Above Us the Waves (1955)</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6382&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 10:45:58 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*ABOVE US THE WAVES* 
 
DIRECTED BY RALPH THOMAS 
PRODUCED BY WILLIAM MACQUITTY/ EATRL ST. JOHN 
LONDON INDEPENDENT PRODUCERS 
GENERAL FILM...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="Blue">ABOVE US THE WAVES</font></font></b><br />
<br />
DIRECTED BY RALPH THOMAS<br />
PRODUCED BY WILLIAM MACQUITTY/ EATRL ST. JOHN<br />
LONDON INDEPENDENT PRODUCERS<br />
GENERAL FILM DISTRIBUTORS/ REPUBLIC PICTURES<br />
<br />
<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/Above-Us-the-Waves-1955_zps7c8e8fd1.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
 Information from IMDb<br />
<br />
<b><u>Plot Summary</u></b><br />
In World War II, the greatest threat to the British navy <br />
is the German battleship Tirpitz. Being anchored in a Norwegian fjord, i<br />
t is impossible to attack it with any chance of success.<br />
 But the navy trains a special commando to attack it, <br />
using little submarines to plant underwater explosives under it. <br />
Written by Mattias Thuresson<br />
	 	<br />
<b><u>Full Cast</u></b><br />
John Mills	... 	Cmdr. Fraser<br />
	John Gregson	... 	Lt Alec Duffy<br />
Donald Sinden	... 	Lt Tom Corbett<br />
James Robertson Justice	... 	Adm. Ryder<br />
	Michael Medwin	... 	Smart<br />
	James Kenney	... 	Abercrombie<br />
	O.E. Hasse	... 	Captain of the Tirpitz (as O. E. Hasse)<br />
	Lee Patterson	... 	Cox<br />
	William Russell	... 	Ramsey<br />
Theodore Bikel	... 	German Officer<br />
	Harry Towb	... 	McCleery<br />
	Cyril Chamberlain	... 	CPO Chubb<br />
	Tony Wager	... 	George (as Anthony Wager)<br />
	Leslie Weston	... 	Winley<br />
	Lyndon Brook	... 	Diver Navigator, X2<br />
	Thomas Heathcote	... 	Hutchins<br />
Anthony Newley	... 	Engineer, X2<br />
	John Horsley	... 	Lt. Anderson<br />
	William Franklyn	... 	No. 1, X2<br />
	Guido Lorraine	... 	Officer Interpreter<br />
	Raymond Francis	... 	Officer on Towing Sub. (I)<br />
Basil Appleby	... 	Officer on Towing Sub. (2) (uncredited)<br />
	Peter Cavanagh	... 	Winston Churchill (voice) (uncredited)<br />
Walter Gotell	... 	German Officer on Tirpitz. (uncredited)<br />
	Barry Keegan	... 	Sailor On Towing Sub. (uncredited)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Writing Credits</u></b><br />
Charles Esme Thornton Warren	 	(book) (as Charles E.T. Warren M.B.E.) and<br />
James D. Benson	 	(book) (as James Benson)<br />
Robin Estridge	 	(screenplay)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Original Music</u></b><br />
Arthur Benjamin	 	<br />
 <br />
<b><u>Cinematography</u></b><br />
Ernest Steward	<br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
The attack by midget submarines did considerable damage, and actually put the Tirpitz out of action. The Tirpitz was later sunk using gigantic 6 ton bombs by R.A.F. Sqn. 617.<br />
<br />
The watch on Commander Fraser's wrist is the famous Jaeger-LeCoultre Reverso, a watch with a case that can be turned around so that the front faces downwards, thus protecting the glass from hard knocks. This robust watch is nowadays considered as an ultra-luxury item.<br />
<br />
When the film was made Queen Elizabeth II was on the throne, but throughout the war it was her father, King George VI, who was the monarch. Whether by design or chance most of the cast in the film have historically accurate cap badges, which is to say they include a King's crown. The notable exception is John Mills, whose cap badge has a Queen's crown.<br />
<br />
This movie features a scene where there is an underwater man-to-man fight between Nazi German and British frogmen in an anti-submarine net but in the real-life mini-sub attack on the Tirpitz, this fight did not occur.<br />
<br />
In this movie, the name of the vessel that carried the manned human torpedo chariots was called &quot;Ingebord&quot; but in the real-life it was really named &quot;Arthur&quot;.<br />
<br />
The code-name of the real life World War II mission that this film was based on was Operation Source. This operation utilized the Royal Navy's midget X class submarines.<br />
<br />
An original member of the real-life mini-sub operations, Commander Donald Fraser, who had been a lieutenant at the time of the mission, acted as a consultant and advisor to the film production.<br />
<br />
This movie is based on both the real-life Chariot human torpedo attacks on the German battleship Tirpitz during the Second World War as well as Operation Source, which was a series of attacks by X-class midget submarines on Nazi German warships, the Tirpitz, Scharnhorst and Lutzow, in Northern Norway during World War II.<br />
<br />
Original military equipment from World War II was accessed and used for the making of this movie.<br />
<br />
The central event of Above us the Waves is the x-craft attack on the battleship Tirpitz. The Captain of x-craft 5, was in reality Henty Henty-Creer. Before the second world war Henty Creer was a film camera man and worked on 49th Parallel, The Thief of Bagdad and The Four Feathers. <br />
<br />
<b><u>Goofs</u></b><br />
<b>Anachronisms </b><br />
The 100' Submarine Escape Training Tank in the early scenes wasn't built until 1954. Prior to this, it was a 15' tank.<br />
<br />
<b>Revealing mistakes </b><br />
In the scene where the captured Brits are being &quot;escorted&quot; down the gangway of the Tirpitz, the German sailors are prodding them not with German weapons, but British Sterling sub machine guns.<br />
<br />
The sub machine guns have wooden stock so are definitely not Stirlings which have curved magazines also. They look more like MP28 Schmiessers (not to be confused with the falsely named MP38/40) or Erma EMP35 which would have been in second line naval service at the time. (They may have been Austrian/Swiss Steyr-Solthuthurn MP34/S1-100 or even British Lanchester MK1 which were used by the RN in the war.)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Filming Locations</u></b><br />
Pinewood Studios, Iver Heath, Buckinghamshire, England, UK<br />
    (studio) <br />
Portland Submarine Base, Portland Bill, Dorset, England, UK<br />
St Peter Port Harbour, Guernsey, Channel Islands<br />
    (scene with the preparation for the abortive first mission <br />
is clearly filmed on Castle Pier, and in the waters around Herm and Sark.<br />
 Historians won't miss the irony of this.<br />
 At the time the film is set, German troops would have occupied the pier.)</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=52">Classic War Movies</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6382</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>(New Profiles) Pals Of The Saddle- William Bryant/ Tony Travers</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6381&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 10:02:06 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*WILLIAM BRYANT* 
 
Image: http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/gunsheriff_zps06adf736.jpg  
 
Information from IMDb 
 
*_Date of...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="Blue">WILLIAM BRYANT</font></font></b><br />
<br />
<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/gunsheriff_zps06adf736.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
Information from IMDb<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date of Birth</u></b><br />
January 31, 1924 <br />
Detroit, Michigan, USA<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date of Death</u></b><br />
June 26, 2001 (age 77)<br />
 Woodland Hills, Los Angeles, California, USA <br />
<br />
<b><u>Mini-Biography</u></b><br />
Born in Detroit, Bryant was a character actor who appeared in films such as King Dinosaur (1955), <br />
Escape from San Quentin (1957), Experiment in Terror (1962), with Glenn Ford, <br />
How to Murder Your Wife and The Great Race with Jack Lemmon, <br />
What Did You Do in the War, Daddy? (1966), McQ (1973), Walking Tall Part II (1975).<br />
<br />
He also played several roles in the classic western movies Heaven with a Gun (1969), <br />
<b>Chisum (1970)</b>, Macho Callahan (1970), Wild Rovers (1971), The Deadly Trackers (1973).<br />
Television<br />
<br />
Most of his career was made on television, including Hallmark Hall of Fame,<br />
 Frontier, Casey Jones, Tales of the Texas Rangers, The Gray Ghost, Maverick,<br />
 The Rebel, Have Gun &#8211; Will Travel, The Rifleman, Laramie, The Virginian,<br />
 Rawhide, Branded, Combat!, Mission Impossible, Bonanza,<br />
 The Man from U.N.C.L.E., Mannix, Jim West, Alias Smith and Jones, Banacek, <br />
McCloud, Columbo, Gunsmoke, Petrocelli, Cannon, The Rockford Files, <br />
Barnaby Jones and many more. He also played the role of Colonel Crook, <br />
in the TV series Hondo and part of the cast in Emergency! (1972&#8211;1978) <br />
as Captain, Branded (1965) as Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, Lancer (1968), as Sheriff Gabe.<br />
<br />
 In 1962, he starred in an unsold television pilot for a proposed<br />
 CBS series called &quot;Johnny Dollar&quot; which based on the popular radio show. <br />
<br />
<b><u><font size="3">Filmography</font></u></b><br />
<br />
<b><u>Actor </u></b><br />
1995 Batman (TV series)&#8211; Showdown (1995) &#8230; Sheriff (voice)<br />
 1995 Panic in the Park (Video Game)...Judge<br />
 1989 Murder, She Wrote (TV series)&#8211; Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall: Part 1 (1989) &#8230; Gadge<br />
 1981-1989 Simon &amp; Simon (TV series)<br />
Crowder / Jonathan Beaumont / Lt. Don Burrows / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; Simon Says 'Good-Bye' (1989) &#8230; Stanley Morfogen<br />
&#8211; Opposites Attack (1987) &#8230; Jonathan Beaumont<br />
&#8211; Reunion at Alcatraz (1985) &#8230; Marshall J. Underwood<br />
&#8211; Betty Grable Flies Again (1983) &#8230; Lt. Don Burrows / Crowder<br />
&#8211; The Least Dangerous Game (1981) &#8230; Mom's Date<br />
 1987 Our House (TV series)&#8211; Sunday's Hero (1987) &#8230; Tom McCullough<br />
 1987 Amazon Women on the Moon..Male Republican (segment &quot;Blacks Without Soul&quot;) (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1987 Prison for Children (TV movie)<br />
 1986 Airwolf (TV series)&#8211; Tracks (1986) &#8230; Hunter<br />
 1986 The Education of Allison Tate...Chauffer<br />
 1986 Hell Squad...Nightclub owner<br />
 1985 Scarecrow and Mrs. King (TV series)&#8211; A Relative Situation (1985) &#8230; General Patterson<br />
 1984 Magnum, P.I. (TV series)&#8211; The Legacy of Garwood Huddle (1984) &#8230; Arnold 'Slick' Sims<br />
 1984 Falcon Crest (TV series)&#8211; Requiem (1984) &#8230; Sheriff Kingman<br />
 1983 Matt Houston (TV series)&#8211; The Centerfold Murders (1983) &#8230; Powers<br />
 1982-1983 The Fall Guy (TV series)<br />
Director / The Director / Movie Director<br />
&#8211; Trauma (1983) &#8230; The Director<br />
&#8211; Just a Small Circle of Friends (1983) &#8230; Director<br />
&#8211; P.S. I Love You (1983) &#8230; Director<br />
&#8211; Strange Bedfellows (1983) &#8230; Director<br />
&#8211; Spaced Out (1983) &#8230; Director<br />
 all 14 episodes »<br />
 1983 Hardcastle and McCormick (TV series)<br />
&#8211; Rolling Thunder: Part 1 (1983)<br />
&#8211; Rolling Thunder: Part 2 (1983)<br />
 1983 Cave In! (TV movie)...Jack Miller<br />
 1983 Dallas (TV series)<br />
&#8211; Tangled Web (1983) &#8230; Jackson<br />
&#8211; Hell Hath No Fury (1983) &#8230; Jackson<br />
 1983 CHiPs (TV series)&#8211; Country Action (1983) &#8230; Gossett<br />
 1982 Voyagers! (TV series)&#8211; Old Hickory and the Pirate (1982) &#8230; Mr. Bundy<br />
 1982 Quincy M.E. (TV series)&#8211; Sleeping Dogs (1982) &#8230; Joe Faraday<br />
 1982 Father Murphy (TV series)&#8211; Happiness Is... (1982)<br />
 1982 Bret Maverick (TV series)&#8211; Dateline: Sweetwater (1982) &#8230; John Davis<br />
 1978-1981 Lou Grant (TV series)<br />
Marston / Robinson / Sgt. Turner<br />
&#8211; Depression (1981) &#8230; Sgt. Turner<br />
&#8211; Witness (1979) &#8230; Robinson<br />
&#8211; Hero (1978) &#8230; Marston<br />
 1981 Buck Rogers in the 25th Century (TV series) The Hand of the Goral (1981) &#8230; Cowan<br />
 1981 Charlie's Angels (TV series)&#8211; Hula Angels (1981) &#8230; Lamont Burns<br />
 1980 The Jeffersons (TV series)<br />
&#8211; The Jeffersons Go to Hawaii: Part 2 (1980) &#8230; Bill Wilson<br />
&#8211; The Jeffersons Go to Hawaii: Part 3 (1980) &#8230; Bill Wilson<br />
 1980 Gridlock (TV movie)...Long Hauler<br />
 1980 CBS Afternoon Playhouse (TV series)<br />
&#8211; One Last Ride - Part 5 (1980) &#8230; Art<br />
&#8211; One Last Ride - Part 4 (1980) &#8230; Art<br />
&#8211; One Last Ride - Part 3 (1980) &#8230; Art<br />
&#8211; One Last Ride - Part 2 (1980) &#8230; Art<br />
&#8211; One Last Ride - Part 1 (1980) &#8230; Art<br />
 1980 The Chisholms (TV mini-series)&#8211; Chains (1980) &#8230; O'Herlihy<br />
 1980 Beyond Westworld (TV series)&#8211; The Lion (1980) &#8230; Eric Lionstar<br />
 1979 Mountain Family Robinson...Forest Ranger<br />
 1979 The Misadventures of Sheriff Lobo (TV series)<br />
&#8211; Run for the Money: Part 3 (1979) &#8230; Ben Hastings<br />
&#8211; Run for the Money: Part 2 (1979) &#8230; Ben Hastings<br />
 1979 B.J. and the Bear (TV series)<br />
Ben Hastings / Willie, Town Drunk<br />
&#8211; Run for the Money (1979) &#8230; Ben Hastings<br />
&#8211; Odyssey of the Shady Truth (1979) &#8230; Willie, Town Drunk<br />
 1979 The Billion Dollar Threat (TV movie)...Harry Grebe<br />
 1979 The Legend of the Golden Gun (TV movie)...William Ford<br />
 1979 The Child Stealer (TV movie)...Dan Miller<br />
 1979 How the West Was Won (TV mini-series)&#8211; The Enemy (1979) &#8230; Colonel Worth <br />
1978 General Hospital (TV series)...Lamont Cortin #2<br />
 1972-1978 Emergency! (TV series)<br />
#110 Captain / Captain / Captain - Engine 10 / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; Greatest Rescues of Emergency (1978) &#8230; Captain Engine *110 (from episode Seance)<br />
&#8211; The Steel Inferno (1978) &#8230; Captain, Engine *16, LACoFD<br />
&#8211; Limelight (1977) &#8230; Captain 16 (as William Bryant)<br />
&#8211; Hypochondri-Cap (1977) &#8230; Captain, Engine *68, LACoFD (as William Bryant)<br />
&#8211; Isolation (1977) (uncredited) all 20 episodes »<br />
 1978 Battlestar Galactica (TV series)&#8211; Fire in Space (1978) &#8230; Fire Leader<br />
 1978 Hawaii Five-O (TV series)&#8211; Small Potatoes (1978) &#8230; Harold Kendricks<br />
 1976-1978 Switch (TV series)<br />
Lt. Shilton / Helmers / Lt. Stafford Shilton<br />
&#8211; Play-Off (1978) &#8230; Lt. Shilton<br />
&#8211; Mexican Standoff (1978) &#8230; Lt. Shilton<br />
&#8211; Formula for Murder (1978) &#8230; Lt. Shilton<br />
&#8211; The Tong (1978) &#8230; Lt. Shilton<br />
&#8211; Dangerous Curves (1978) &#8230; Lt. Shilton<br />
 all 14 episodes »<br />
 1978 Corvette Summer...Plain Clothes Police Lecturer<br />
 1976-1978 Police Story (TV series)<br />
Clawson / Powers<br />
&#8211; The Broken Badge (1978) &#8230; Powers<br />
&#8211; Firebird (1976) &#8230; Clawson<br />
 1978 Gray Lady Down<br />
 1978 The Other Side of the Mountain: Part II...Bill Kinmont<br />
 1977 Code R (TV series)&#8211; Black Out (1977) &#8230; Sam Whitlow<br />
 1977 Kingston: Confidential (TV series)&#8211; Seed of Corruption (1977) &#8230; Lieutenant Mackey<br />
 1976 The Bionic Woman (TV series)<br />
Captain Jetton<br />
&#8211; Jaime's Shield: Part 2 (1976) &#8230; Captain Jetton<br />
&#8211; Jaime's Shield (1976) &#8230; Captain Jetton<br />
 1976 Steel Cowboy (TV movie)...Jennings<br />
 1976 Once an Eagle (TV mini-series)<br />
1976 Captains and the Kings (TV mini-series)&#8211; Chapter VIII (1976) &#8230; Skeeter<br />
 1976 Two-Minute Warning...Lt. Calloway<br />
 1976 Mayday at 40,000 Feet! (TV movie)...Kent<br />
 1973-1976 Barnaby Jones (TV series)<br />
Roy Gaddis / Sam Mason / Sheriff Coulton<br />
&#8211; Final Ransom (1976) &#8230; Sheriff Coulton<br />
&#8211; The Deadly Conspiracy: Part 2 (1975) &#8230; Roy Gaddis<br />
&#8211; The Killing Defense (1973) &#8230; Sam Mason<br />
 1976 The Waltons (TV series)&#8211; The Cloudburst (1976) &#8230; Lyle Carter<br />
1976 Shazam! (TV series)&#8211; Ripcord (1976) &#8230; Harry Miller<br />
 1976 Disneyland (TV series)&#8211; The Flight of the Grey Wolf: Part 2 (1976) &#8230; Mr. Hanson<br />
&#8211; The Flight of the Grey Wolf: Part 1 (1976) &#8230; Mr. Hanson<br />
 1976 The Flight of the Grey Wolf (TV movie)...Mr. Hanson<br />
 1976 Gable and Lombard...Colonel<br />
 1976 The Macahans (TV movie)...Major at Shiloh<br />
 1974-1975 The Rockford Files (TV series)<br />
Paul Flanders / Thug<br />
&#8211; The Girl in the Bay City Boys Club (1975) &#8230; Paul Flanders<br />
&#8211; The Countess (1974) &#8230; Thug (uncredited)<br />
 1975 The Other Side of the Mountain...Bill Kinmont<br />
 1975 Legend of the Lawman...F.B.I. Man<br />
 1975 Death Scream (TV movie)...Harry Whitmore<br />
 1975 Cannon (TV series)<br />
Police Lieutenant / Roy Gladdis<br />
&#8211; The Deadly Conspiracy (1975) &#8230; Roy Gladdis<br />
&#8211; Killer on the Hill (1975) &#8230; Police Lieutenant<br />
 1975 Petrocelli (TV series)&#8211; Four the Hard Way (1975) &#8230; Brian Scholfield<br />
 1975 The Last Survivors (TV movie)...Capt. Harris<br />
 1957-1974 Gun Law (TV series)<br />
1st Cowboy / Bennett / Charlie Frost / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; The Iron Men (1974) &#8230; Sheriff<br />
&#8211; Alias Festus Haggin (1972) &#8230; Bennett<br />
&#8211; Chato (1970) &#8230; Marshal Dan Cooter<br />
&#8211; Quaker Girl (1966) &#8230; Kester<br />
&#8211; Once a Haggen (1964) &#8230; Townsman (uncredited)<br />
 all 8 episodes »<br />
 1974 Death in Space (TV movie)<br />
 1974 ABC Afterschool Specials (TV series)&#8211; Runaways (1974) &#8230; Detective<br />
 1974 The Hanged Man (TV movie)...Dr. Lawrence Nye<br />
 1973-1974 Columbo (TV series)<br />
Fields / Sgt. Jeffries<br />
&#8211; Mind Over Mayhem (1974) &#8230; Fields<br />
&#8211; Requiem for a Falling Star (1973) &#8230; Sgt. Jeffries<br />
 1972-1974 Ironside (TV series)<br />
Jake Spencer / Richard Gillis<br />
&#8211; Class of '40 (1974) &#8230; Richard Gillis<br />
&#8211; Riddle Me Death (1972) &#8230; Jake Spencer<br />
 1974 McMillan &amp; Wife (TV series)&#8211; The Man Without a Face (1974) &#8230; Father Regan<br />
<b> 1974 McQ...Stan Boyle</b><br />
 1973 The Deadly Trackers...Deputy Bill<br />
 1973 Dusty's Trail (TV series)&#8211; Androcles and the Bear (1973) &#8230; Blake<br />
 1970-1973 McCloud (TV series)<br />
Courier / Detective Parker / Policeman<br />
&#8211; Butch Cassidy Rides Again (1973) &#8230; Courier (as Bill Bryant)<br />
&#8211; Somebody's Out to Get Jennie (1971) &#8230; Detective Parker<br />
&#8211; Horse Stealing on Fifth Avenue (1970) &#8230; Policeman<br />
 1973 Chase (TV series)&#8211; Foul-Up (1973) &#8230; Brace<br />
 1973 The Stranger (TV movie)...Truck Driver<br />
 1973 The Rookies (TV series)&#8211; Three Hours to Kill (1973) &#8230; Claude Samples<br />
 1971-1973 The F.B.I. (TV series)<br />
Earl Benner / Richmond Tate<br />
&#8211; Desperate Journey (1973) &#8230; Earl Benner<br />
&#8211; End of a Hero (1971) &#8230; Richmond Tate<br />
 1972 Banacek (TV series)&#8211; A Million the Hard Way (1972) &#8230; Burns<br />
 1968-1972 Mannix (TV series)<br />
Norman Kiley / Schaeffer<br />
&#8211; Portrait of a Hero (1972) &#8230; Schaeffer<br />
&#8211; Eight to Five, It's a Miracle (1968) &#8230; Norman Kiley<br />
 1967-1972 Bonanza (TV series)<br />
Abner Jackson / Beau / Governor / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; Riot (1972) &#8230; Governor<br />
&#8211; Return Engagement (1970) &#8230; Lew<br />
&#8211; Company of Forgotten Men (1969) &#8230; Beau<br />
&#8211; The Stronghold (1968) &#8230; Abner Jackson<br />
&#8211; The Sure Thing (1967) &#8230; Harper<br />
 1972 Conquest of the Planet of the Apes...Man at Auction (uncredited)<br />
 1972 Echoes of the Road (uncredited)<br />
 1972 The New Healers (TV movie)...Mr. McDermott<br />
 1972 Cade's County (TV series)&#8211; Jessie (1972) &#8230; Phil Torre (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1972 O'Hara, U.S. Treasury (TV series)t&#8211; Operation: Smokescreen (1972) &#8230; John Cossett<br />
 1972 The Sixth Sense (TV series)&#8211; The House That Cried Murder (1972) &#8230; Detective Neal Jensen<br />
 1972 Women in Chains (TV movie)...Doctor<br />
 1972 Sarge (TV series)&#8211; Napoleon Never Wanted to Be a Cop (1972) &#8230; Paul Trinn<br />
 1972 Killer by Night (TV movie)...Frank Roland (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1971 The Resurrection of Zachary Wheeler...Craig Harmon<br />
 1971 Black Noon (TV movie)...Jacob<br />
 1971 Sweet, Sweet Rachel (TV movie)...Doctor<br />
 1971 Alias Smith and Jones (TV series)<br />
Barker / Fred Gaines<br />
&#8211; Jailbreak at Junction City (1971) &#8230; Barker (as Wm. Bryant)<br />
&#8211; Wrong Train to Brimstone (1971) &#8230; Fred Gaines<br />
 1971 Wild Rovers...Hereford<br />
 1971 Bearcats! (TV series)&#8211; Powderkeg (1971) &#8230; Major Bill Buckner<br />
 1971 The Name of the Game (TV series)&#8211; The Man Who Killed a Ghost (1971) &#8230; Fry Cook<br />
 1971 City Beneath the Sea (TV movie)...Capt. Lunderson<br />
 1970 Macho Callahan...Dealer<br />
<b> 1970 Chisum...Jeff - Head Wrangler</b><br />
 1970 The Andersonville Trial (TV movie)...The Lieutenant<br />
 1970 Five Savage Men...Sheriff Martin Lord<br />
 1969 Mission: Impossible (TV series)&#8211; Mastermind (1969) &#8230; Nicholson<br />
 1968-1969 Lancer (TV series)<br />
Sheriff Gabe / Sheriff<br />
&#8211; Zee (1969) &#8230; Sheriff Gabe<br />
&#8211; The Black McGloins (1969) &#8230; Sheriff Gabe<br />
&#8211; The Last Train for Charlie Poe (1968) &#8230; Sheriff Gabe<br />
&#8211; Jelly (1968) &#8230; Sheriff<br />
 1969 Heaven with a Gun...Bart Paterson (cattleman)<br />
 1969 It Takes a Thief (TV series)&#8211; The Great Chess Gambit (1969) &#8230; Pilot, Major Banks<br />
 1969 The Wild Wild West (TV series)&#8211; The Night of the Plague (1969) &#8230; Duncan Lansing<br />
 1969 Smith!...Corporal/Court Bailiff (uncredited)<br />
 1968 Garrison's Gorillas (TV series)<br />
Maj. Johns / Major Lumis<br />
&#8211; The Plot to Kill (1968) &#8230; Major Lumis<br />
&#8211; War and Crime (1968) &#8230; Maj. Johns<br />
 1968 The Guns of Will Sonnett (TV series)&#8211; Stopover in a Troubled Town (1968) &#8230; Spangler<br />
 1967 Hondo (TV series)<br />
Col. Crook<br />
&#8211; Hondo and the Rebel Hat (1967) &#8230; Col. Crook<br />
&#8211; Hondo and the Apache Trail (1967) &#8230; Col. Crook<br />
&#8211; Hondo and the Gladiators (1967) &#8230; Col. Crook<br />
&#8211; Hondo and the Hanging Town (1967) &#8230; Col. Crook<br />
&#8211; Hondo and the Death Drive (1967) &#8230; Col. Crook<br />
 all 17 episodes »<br />
 1967 The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (TV series)&#8211; The Five Daughters Affair: Part II (1967) &#8230; Technician<br />
 1967 The Rat Patrol (TV series)&#8211; The Wild Goose Raid (1967) &#8230; Major Reese<br />
 1967 Hotel...Sergeant (uncredited)<br />
 1962-1967 Combat! (TV series)<br />
McCall / Larkin / Maj. O'Connors / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; Gadjo (1967) &#8230; McCall<br />
&#8211; The Bankroll (1966) &#8230; McCall<br />
&#8211; Conflict (1966) &#8230; McCall<br />
&#8211; The Outsider (1966) &#8230; McCall<br />
&#8211; Decision (1966) &#8230; McCall<br />
 all 9 episodes »<br />
 1966 The Monroes (TV series)&#8211; Court Martial (1966) &#8230; Lance Corporal Gardner<br />
 1966 What Did You Do in the War, Daddy?...Minow<br />
 1965-1966 Branded (TV series)<br />
President Ulysses S. Grant / Gen. Ulysses S. Grant<br />
&#8211; The Assassins: Part 2 (1966) &#8230; President Ulysses S. Grant<br />
&#8211; The Assassins: Part 1 (1966) &#8230; President Ulysses S. Grant<br />
&#8211; Call to Glory: Part 3 (1966) &#8230; President Ulysses S. Grant (uncredited)<br />
&#8211; Call to Glory: Part 2 (1966) &#8230; President Ulysses S. Grant (uncredited)<br />
&#8211; Call to Glory: Part 1 (1966) &#8230; President Ulysses S. Grant<br />
 all 9 episodes »<br />
 1966 Ride Beyond Vengeance...Bartender<br />
 1965 Theatre of Stars (TV series)&#8211; The Admiral (1965)<br />
 1964-1965 Rawhide (TV series)<br />
George Lockwood / Turner<br />
&#8211; The Vasquez Woman (1965) &#8230; Turner (uncredited)<br />
&#8211; The Race (1964) &#8230; George Lockwood<br />
 1965 12 O'Clock High (TV series)&#8211; The Hotshot (1965) &#8230; Maj. Greentree<br />
 1965 The Great Race...Baron's Guard<br />
 1965 The Satan Bug...SDI Agent at Gas Station (uncredited)<br />
 1965 How to Murder Your Wife...Construction Worker<br />
 1964 Good Neighbor Sam...Hausner (uncredited)<br />
 1964 Temple Houston (TV series)&#8211; Sam's Boy (1964) &#8230; Cy Morgan<br />
 1963 The Virginian (TV series)&#8211; Man of Violence (1963) &#8230; Paul Judson<br />
 1963 The Pink Panther...Policeman (uncredited)<br />
 1963 The Bill Dana Show (TV series)&#8211; Jose, the Astronaut (1963) &#8230; the Astronaut<br />
 1963 Wagon Train (TV series)<br />
Captain Jeterman<br />
&#8211; The Robert Harrison Clarke Story (1963) &#8230; Captain Jeterman<br />
 1963 Arrest and Trial (TV series)&#8211; A Shield Is for Hiding Behind (1963) &#8230; Gingrich<br />
 1959-1963 Laramie (TV series)<br />
Bud Deever / Curly Troy / Ed Casson / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; The Marshals (1963) &#8230; Reb Carlton<br />
&#8211; Double Eagles (1962) &#8230; Ed Casson<br />
&#8211; Ladies Day (1961) &#8230; Bud Deever<br />
&#8211; No Second Chance (1960) &#8230; Tracy - Hired Gunman<br />
&#8211; Company Man (1960) &#8230; Skinny<br />
 all 6 episodes »<br />
 1963 Big G (TV series)&#8211; End of an Image (1963) &#8230; Fred Rainey<br />
 1962 Death Valley Days (TV series)<br />
&#8211; The Vintage Years (1962) &#8230; Meadows<br />
 1962 Ben Casey (TV series)&#8211; Of All Save Pain Bereft (1962) &#8230; Gil Lattimer<br />
 1958-1962 The Rifleman (TV series)<br />
Jerry / Karl Hollis / Pvt. Coley / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; The Assailants (1962) &#8230; Pvt. Coley<br />
&#8211; Gunfire (1962) &#8230; Karl Hollis<br />
&#8211; Shivaree (1959) &#8230; Jerry<br />
&#8211; The Apprentice Sheriff (1958) &#8230; Sandy Dixon<br />
 1962 The Detectives (TV series)&#8211; The Walls Have Eyes (1962) &#8230; Fowler<br />
 1962 The Grip of Fear...Chuck<br />
 1962 The Untouchables (TV series)&#8211; Takeover (1962) &#8230; Prosecuting Attorney<br />
 1961 Bronco (TV series)&#8211; One Came Back (1961) &#8230; Sgt. Willoughby<br />
 1961 Miami Undercover (TV series)&#8211; Auto Motive (1961) &#8230; Pat Faraday<br />
 1959-1961 Have Gun - Will Travel (TV series)<br />
&#8211; The Uneasy Grave (1961) &#8230; Loafer<br />
&#8211; Charley Red Dog (1959) &#8230; Ed<br />
 1959-1961 The Rebel (TV series)<br />
Danny Brown / Don Longdon / Gen. U. S. Grant / &#8230;<br />
&#8211; The Proxy (1961) &#8230; Major Lipscott<br />
&#8211; The Ballad of Danny Brown (1961) &#8230; Danny Brown<br />
&#8211; Vindication (1960) &#8230; Sam Boley<br />
&#8211; The Waiting (1960) &#8230; Sheriff Ed Strode<br />
&#8211; Johnny Yuma at Appomattox (1960) &#8230; Gen. U. S. Grant<br />
all 8 episodes »<br />
 1961 Peter Gunn (TV series)&#8211; The Deep End (1961) &#8230; Phil Matterson<br />
 1961 Michael Shayne (TV series)&#8211; Final Settlement (1961) &#8230; Wally Faye<br />
 1961 Two Faces West (TV series)&#8211; The Trespasser (1961) &#8230; Cory<br />
 1961 Las Vegas Beat (TV movie)./..R.G. Joseph<br />
 1960 The Blue Angels (TV series)<br />
&#8211; The Diamond Goes to War (1960) &#8230; Charlie Robinson<br />
&#8211; Sierra Survival - Part 2 (1960) &#8230; Charlie Robinson<br />
 1959-1960 Lock Up (TV series)<br />
Ralph / Stan Bronson<br />
&#8211; The Frame Up (1960) (as Willie Bryant)<br />
&#8211; Sentenced to Die (1960) &#8230; Ralph<br />
&#8211; End of the World (1959) &#8230; Stan Bronson<br />
 1960 Outlaws (TV series)&#8211; The Rape of Red Sky (1960) &#8230; Jack Roos<br />
 1960 Zane Grey Theater (TV series)&#8211; A Small Town That Died (1960) &#8230; Jess Clarke<br />
 1960 The Man from Blackhawk (TV series)&#8211; The Biggest Legend (1960) &#8230; Dawson<br />
 1959 Operation Petticoat...Crewman (uncredited)<br />
 1959 Hotel de Paree (TV series)&#8211; The Man Who Believed in Law (1959) &#8230; Duke (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1959 Tenderfoot (TV series)&#8211; Outlaw Island (1959) &#8230; Chris Van Ralt<br />
 1959 Adventure Showcase (TV series)&#8211; War Correspondent (1959)<br />
 1958-1959 Steve Canyon (TV series)<br />
Captain Kirby / Lt. Kirby<br />
&#8211; Strike Force (1959) &#8230; Captain Kirby<br />
&#8211; The Gift (1958) &#8230; Lt. Kirby<br />
 1958 Cimarron City (TV series)&#8211; The Blood Line (1958) &#8230; Gambler<br />
 1958 Maverick (TV series)&#8211; Prey of the Cat (1958) &#8230; Chase<br />
 1958 Behind Closed Doors (TV series)&#8211; The Nike Story (1958) &#8230; Captain Peter Shiller<br />
 1958 Flight (TV series)&#8211; The Snark<br />
 1958 Frontier Doctor (TV series)&#8211; Double Boomerang (1958) &#8230; Clay Hubbard<br />
 1958 Target (TV series)&#8211; Unreasonable Doubt (1958) &#8230; Ralph<br />
 1958 Badman's Country...Roy Pardee (uncredited)<br />
 1958 How to Marry a Millionaire (TV series)&#8211; The Shortstop (1958)<br />
 1955-1958 Adventures of Wild Bill Hickok (TV series)<br />
Clem Orton / Dr. Jeff Laughton<br />
&#8211; Clem's Reformation (1958) &#8230; Clem Orton<br />
&#8211; The Mountain Men (1955)<br />
&#8211; Sundown Valley (1955) &#8230; Dr. Jeff Laughton<br />
 1955-1958 The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp (TV series)<br />
Billy Joe Omahadro / Ed Watkins<br />
&#8211; The Schoolteacher (1958) &#8230; Ed Watkins<br />
&#8211; The Gambler (1955) &#8230; Billy Joe Omahadro<br />
 1958 The Gray Ghost (TV series)&#8211; Manhunt (1958) &#8230; Captain Jim Carpenter<br />
 1957 Harbor Command (TV series)&#8211; Ransom at Sea (1957)<br />
 1957 Tales of the Texas Rangers (TV series)&#8211; Double Reward (1957) &#8230; Pete Diamond<br />
 1957 Casey Jones (TV series)&#8211; The Gunslinger (1957) &#8230; Doc Bailey<br />
 1957 Escape from San Quentin...Richie<br />
 1957 M Squad (TV series)&#8211; The Watchdog (1957) &#8230; Reporter<br />
<b> 1957 Jet Pilot...Radar Monitor (uncredited)</b><br />
 1957 The Web (TV series)&#8211; Dead Silence (1957) &#8230; Host/Narrator<br />
 1957 The Silent Service (TV series)&#8211; The Narwhal's Passenger from Mindanao (1957) (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1956-1957 Playhouse 90 (TV series)<br />
Calhoun / Pfc. Paul Tanier<br />
&#8211; Ain't No Time for Glory (1957) &#8230; Pfc. Paul Tanier<br />
&#8211; Massacre at Sand Creek (1956) &#8230; Calhoun<br />
 1957 Whirlybirds (TV series)&#8211; Lynch Mob (1957) &#8230; Deputy<br />
 1956 Massacre at Sand Creek (TV movie)...Lt. Norman Tucker (uncredited)<br />
 1956 Tales of the 77th Bengal Lancers (TV series)&#8211; The Weakling (1956)<br />
 1956 Frontier (TV series)&#8211; The Ballad of Pretty Polly (1956) &#8230; Logan (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1956 The Adventures of Rin Tin Tin (TV series)&#8211; The Missing Heir (1956) &#8230; Stephen Barrington<br />
 1956 Three Bad Sisters...Deputy Sheriff (uncredited)<br />
 1956 Inside Detroit...Tom Vickers (uncredited)<br />
 1955 Celebrity Playhouse (TV series)&#8211; Silver Saddle (1955) &#8230; The Pinto Kid<br />
 1955 Navy Log (TV series)&#8211; The Transfer (1955) &#8230; Personnel Officer<br />
 1955 Bobby Ware Is Missing...O'Neill (uncredited)<br />
 1955 It Came from Beneath the Sea...Helicopter Pilot (uncredited)<br />
 1955 Damon Runyon Theater (TV series)&#8211; The Big Fix (1955) &#8230; Steve Randall<br />
 1955 King Dinosaur...Dr. Ralph Martin (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1955 The Hammer and the Sword (TV movie)...Lieutenant<br />
 1955 Stage 7 (TV series)&#8211; Emergency (1955) &#8230; Peter Shipstead<br />
 1955 A Bullet for Joey...Jack Allen (from L.A.) (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1955 Dr. Harvey W. Wiley (TV movie)...Lieutenant (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1955 Waterfront (TV series)&#8211; The Yacht Race (1955) &#8230; Stanwhite<br />
 1954 Battle of Rogue River...Corporal (as Bill Bryant)<br />
 1953 Sky Commando...Lt. John 'Johnny' Willard (as William R. Klein)<br />
 1953 The 49th Man...FBI Agent in Montage (as William R. Klein)<br />
 1953 Military Policemen...Soldier (uncredited)<br />
 1952 Voodoo Tiger...Co-Pilot (uncredited)<br />
 1951 Purple Heart Diary...Lt. Hughes (uncredited)<br />
 1951 People Will Talk...Student Manager (uncredited)<br />
 1950 My Blue Heaven...Minor Role (uncredited)<br />
 1950 When Willie Comes Marching Home...B-17 Crew Member in Cockpit (uncredited)<br />
 1949 Twelve O'Clock High...Radio Operator (uncredited) <br />
)</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34">Pals of the Saddle- Cowboys</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6381</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Large JW DVD Library for sale</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6380&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 15:40:27 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[Check out my ebay lot listing of 150 titles: 
 
[URL="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190837568219&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT"]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>Check out my ebay lot listing of 150 titles:<br />
<br />
[URL=&quot;http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&amp;item=190837568219&amp;ssPageNam  e=STRK:MESE:IT&quot;]</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8">The Trading Post</category>
			<dc:creator>royshort</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6380</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>(New Review) Classic Movie Westerns- Duel at Diablo (1966)</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6379&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 13:46:04 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*DUEL AT DIABLO* 
 
DIRECTED BY RALPH NELSON 
PRODUCED BY  FRED ENGEL/ RALPH NELSON 
CHEROKEE PRODUCTIONS 
UNITED ARTISTS 
 
Image:...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="Sienna">DUEL AT DIABLO</font></font></b><br />
<br />
DIRECTED BY RALPH NELSON<br />
PRODUCED BY  FRED ENGEL/ RALPH NELSON<br />
CHEROKEE PRODUCTIONS<br />
UNITED ARTISTS<br />
<br />
<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/duelo_en_diablo_1966_1_zps0044d5fc.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
Information from IMDb<br />
<br />
Plot Summary <br />
Lieutenant McAllister is ordered to transport several ammunition wagons <br />
to another fort through Apache territory with only a small troop of rookie soldiers to guard them.<br />
 Along for the ride is ex-scout Jess Remsberg who is trying to track down Ellen Grange,<br />
 who, having recently been freed from Apache captivity, has mysteriously run off again <br />
to rejoin them. Remsberg frees Ellen again and leaves her with the embattled soldiers <br />
as he rides off to the fort, not only for help, but to find the man who killed <br />
and scalped his Indian wife. <br />
Written by Doug Sederberg <br />
 	<br />
<b><u>Full Cast </u></b><br />
James Garner	... 	Jess Remsberg<br />
Sidney Poitier	... 	Toller<br />
Bibi Andersson	... 	Ellen Grange<br />
Dennis Weaver	... 	Willard Grange<br />
Bill Travers	... 	Lt. Scotty McAllister<br />
	William Redfield	... 	Sgt. Ferguson<br />
	John Hubbard	... 	Maj. Novac<br />
	Ralph Nelson	... 	Col. Foster (as Alf Elson)<br />
Bill Hart	... 	Cpl. Harrington<br />
	John Hoyt	... 	Chata<br />
	Eddie Little Sky	... 	Alchise<br />
	John Crawford	... 	Clay Dean<br />
	Armand Alzamora	... 	Ramirez (uncredited)<br />
	Ralph Bahnsen	... 	Trooper Nyles (uncredited)<br />
	Jeff Cooper	... 	Trooper Casey (uncredited)<br />
	Kevin Coughlin	... 	Norton (uncredited)<br />
	Robert Crawford Jr.	... 	Trooper Swenson - Bugler (uncredited)<br />
	John Daheim	... 	Stableman at Fort Creel (uncredited)<br />
Richard Farnsworth	... 	Wagon Driver #1 (uncredited)<br />
	Joe Finnegan	... 	Wagon Driver #2 (uncredited)<br />
	Richard Lapp	... 	Forbes (uncredited)<br />
	Dawn Little Sky	... 	Chata's Wife (uncredited)<br />
	J.R. Randall	... 	Crowley (uncredited)<br />
	Jay Ripley	... 	Tech (uncredited)<br />
	Phil Schumacher	... 	Burly Soldier (uncredited)<br />
	Al Wyatt Sr.	... 	Miner (uncredited)<br />
<br />
<b>Writing Credits</b><br />
Marvin H. Albert	 	(screenplay) and<br />
Michael M. Grilikhes	 	(screenplay) (as Michel M. Grilikhes)<br />
Marvin H. Albert	 	(novel &quot;Apache Rising&quot;)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Original Music </u></b><br />
Neal Hefti	 	<br />
 <br />
<b><u>Cinematography</u></b><br />
Charles F. Wheeler	 <br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
Unknown<br />
<br />
<b><u>Goofs</u></b><br />
As James Garner and others descend a rock wall via ropes under a full moon, <br />
the men each cast two shadows.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060355/trivia?tab=qt&amp;ref_=tt_trv_qu" target="_blank"><b><u>Memorable Quotes</u></b></a><br />
<br />
<b><u>Filming Locations</u></b><br />
Johnson Canyon, Kanab, Utah, USA<br />
Kanab Movie Fort, Kanab, Utah, USA<br />
Kanab Movie Ranch - 5001 Angel Canyon Road, Kanab, Utah, USA<br />
Kanab, Utah, USA<br />
Paria, Utah, USA<br />
Southern Utah, Utah, USA</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=51">Classic Movie Westerns</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6379</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Screen Legends- Audrey Hepburn</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6378&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 11:07:21 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*AUDREY HEPBURN* 
 
Image: http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/Audrey-Hepburn-9335788-2-402_zps23c93380.jpg  
 
Information from IMDb 
...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="DarkRed">AUDREY HEPBURN</font></font></b><br />
<br />
<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/Audrey-Hepburn-9335788-2-402_zps23c93380.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
Information from IMDb<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date of Birth</u></b><br />
4 May 1929,<br />
 Ixelles, Belgium<br />
<br />
<b><u>Date of Death</u></b><br />
20 January 1993, <br />
Tolochenaz, Switzerland (appendiceal cancer)<br />
<br />
Birth Name<br />
Audrey Kathleen Ruston<br />
<br />
Height<br />
5' 6½&quot; (1.69 m) <br />
<br />
<br />
Spouse<br />
Andrea Dotti 	(18 January 1969 - 21 September 1982) (divorced) 1 child<br />
Mel Ferrer 	(25 September 1954 - 5 December 1968) (divorced) 1 child<br />
<br />
Trade Mark<br />
<br />
Her elegant beauty.<br />
<br />
Often cast opposite leading men who were considerably older than she was.<br />
<br />
Often played classy High Society women.<br />
<br />
Charming characters who try to wear their troubles lightly<br />
<br />
Wide, brown eyes.<br />
<br />
Delicate, slender figure<br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
Was first choice for the lead in A Taste of Honey (1961).<br />
<br />
Ranked #50 in Empire (UK) magazine's &quot;The Top 100 Movie Stars of All Time&quot; list. [October 1997]<br />
<br />
Mother of Sean H. Ferrer, with first husband, Mel Ferrer.<br />
<br />
Son, Luca Dotti (b. 8 February 1970), with second husband, Dr. Andrea Dotti.<br />
<br />
Chosen by People magazine as one of the 50 Most Beautiful People in the world. [1990]<br />
<br />
After Wait Until Dark (1967) was offered the leads in Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1969), 40 Carats (1973), Nicholas and Alexandra (1971), The Exorcist (1973), One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975), A Bridge Too Far (1977) and The Turning Point (1977) but decided to stay in retirement and raise her sons.<br />
<br />
Interred in Tolochenaz, Vaud, Switzerland.<br />
<br />
Chosen by Empire magazine as one of the 100 Sexiest Stars in film history (#8). [1995]<br />
<br />
Turned down the film Gigi (1958) after creating the character in the Broadway non musical play.<br />
<br />
Had a breed of tulip named after her in 1990.<br />
<br />
Died on January 20, 1993, the day of Bill Clinton's first inauguration as President of the United States and the 67th birthday of Patricia Neal. They starred together in Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961).<br />
<br />
She won the 1953 Best Actress Academy Award for Roman Holiday (1953). On March 25th, 1954, she accepted the award from the much revered Academy president Jean Hersholt. After accepting the award, Audrey kissed him smack on the mouth, instead of the cheek, in her excitement. Minutes after accepting her 1953 Oscar, Audrey realized that she'd misplaced it. Turning quickly on the steps of the Center Theater in New York, she raced back to the ladies' room, retrieved the award, and was ready to pose for photographs.<br />
<br />
Christened simply Audrey Kathleen Ruston, her mother Baroness Ella Van Heemstra temporarily changed the actress' name from Audrey to Edda during the war, feeling that &quot;Audrey&quot; might indicate her British roots too strongly. During the war, being English in occupied Netherlands was not an asset; it could have attracted the attention of the occupying German forces and resulted in confinement or even deportation. After the war her father Joseph Victor Anthony Ruston found documents about his ancestors, some of whom bore the name Hepburn. This is when he added it to his name, which caused her daughter to have to add Hepburn to her legal name as well, thus Audrey Kathleen Hepburn-Ruston.<br />
<br />
Was fluent in English, Dutch, Spanish, French, and Italian. She was raised bilingually; speaking English and Dutch (resulting in her unique accent). Throughout her life, she used multilingualism to great advantage with international press in both her careers as an actress and humanitarian.<br />
<br />
Was briefly considered for the main role in Cleopatra (1963) but the part went to Elizabeth Taylor<br />
<br />
She confessed to eating tulip bulbs and tried to bake grass into bread during the hard days of World War II.<br />
<br />
Audrey felt that she was miscast as Holly Golightly in Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961) although it was one of her most popular roles.<br />
<br />
Was trained as a dental assistant before making it big.<br />
<br />
Henry Mancini said of her: &quot;'Moon River' was written for her. No one else had ever understood it so completely. There have been more than a thousand versions of 'Moon River', but hers is inquestionably the greatest&quot;.<br />
<br />
Turned down a role in the film The Diary of Anne Frank (1959) because, as a young girl in the Netherlands during the war, she had witnessed Nazi soldiers publicly executing people in the streets and herding Jews onto railroad cars to be sent to the death camps. She said that participating in the film would bring back too many painful memories for her.<br />
<br />
Like Humphrey Bogart, Hepburn also starred in five of the movies listed by American Film Institute in its Top 100 U.S. love stories (2002). They are Roman Holiday (1953), ranked #4 on the list, Sabrina (1954) ranked #54, which co-starred Bogart, My Fair Lady (1964) ranked #12, Two for the Road (1967) at #57 and Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961) #61.<br />
<br />
During the battle of Arnhem, 16-year-old Audrey was a volunteer nurse in a Dutch hospital. The hospital received many wounded Allied soldiers, one of whom young Audrey helped nurse back to health was a young British paratrooper - and future director - named Terence Young. More than 20 years later, Young directed Hepburn in Wait Until Dark (1967).<br />
<br />
In 1954 she was presented with her Best Actress Oscar for Roman Holiday (1953) by Jean Hersholt. In 1993 she was posthumously awarded the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award.<br />
<br />
During World War II, she lived in Arnhem, Netherlands. She worked with the Dutch Underground, giving ballet performances to collect donations for the anti-Nazi effort and as an occasional courier. She also received dance training and later studied ballet in London.<br />
<br />
Presented the Best Picture Oscar at the Academy Awards four times (in 1955, 1960, 1966, and 1975), more than any other actress.<br />
<br />
Told People Magazine that she was very self-conscious about her size-10 feet.<br />
<br />
She was voted the 21st Greatest Movie Star of all time by Entertainment Weekly.<br />
<br />
In 1993 she became the thirteenth performer to win the Triple Crown of Acting. Oscar - Best Actress for Roman Holiday (1953), Tony for Best Actress in a Play for &quot;Ondine&quot; (1954) and Emmy for Outstanding Individual Achievement - Informational Programming for &quot;Gardens of the World with Audrey Hepburn&quot; (1993).<br />
<br />
Was fashion designer Hubert de Givenchy's muse, who dressed her for the films Sabrina (1954), Funny Face (1957), Love in the Afternoon (1957), Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961), Paris When It Sizzles (1964), How to Steal a Million (1966), Charade (1963) and Love Among Thieves (1987) (TV).<br />
<br />
In 1996 the British magazine Harpers &amp; Queen conducted a poll to find the most fascinating women of our time. She was in the #1 spot.<br />
<br />
As of 2005, she is one of only nine performers to win an Oscar, a Tony, an Emmy and a Grammy Award.<br />
<br />
She was of Dutch, English, and Austrian descent.<br />
<br />
Followed winning the Academy Award for Roman Holiday (1953) with winning Broadway's 1954 Tony Award as Best Actress (Dramatic) for &quot;Ondine.&quot;<br />
<br />
Voted #1 in TheAge.com's Top 100: Natural Beauties of all time.<br />
<br />
She owned a Yorkshire Terrier called &quot;Mr. Famous&quot;.<br />
<br />
She was voted the 18th Greatest Movie Star of all time by Premiere Magazine.<br />
<br />
Was named #3 on The American Film Institute's 50 Greatest Screen Legends<br />
<br />
Her biggest film regret was not getting the Anne Bancroft role in The Turning Point (1977). &quot;That was the one film&quot;, she later admitted, &quot;that got away from me.&quot;<br />
<br />
Is portrayed by Jennifer Love Hewitt in The Audrey Hepburn Story (2000) (TV)<br />
<br />
When she failed to receive an Academy Award nomination for her role as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady (1964), Katharine Hepburn wired her with a message of encouragement: &quot;Don't worry about it. You'll get it one day for a part that doesn't rate it.&quot; Ironically, when Audrey's next (and last) nomination came for Wait Until Dark (1967) in 1967, Hepburn beat her in Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967) - in a part that arguably didn't rate it.<br />
<br />
Her character in Funny Face (1957) was inspired by Suzy Parker, who made a fashionable cameo appearance in the film (her first film) in the &quot;Think Pink&quot; sequence.<br />
<br />
According to her biography, &quot;Audrey Hepburn: An Intimate Portrait&quot;, she made a vow to herself never to exceed 103 pounds. With the exception of her pregnancies, she succeeded.<br />
<br />
Turned down the title role in Gigi (1958) to make Funny Face (1957). Ironically, her agent initially rejected the film, but Hepburn overrode the decision after reading the script. Her mother, Baroness Ella Van Heemstra, makes a cameo appearance as a sidewalk café patron, and her Yorkshire terrier &quot;Mr. Famous&quot; appears as the dog in the basket during the &quot;Anna Karenina&quot; train shot. Hepburn did not want to be separated from husband Mel Ferrer, so filming of the Paris scenes was timed to coincide with Ferrer's filming of Paris Does Strange Things (1956). Paris' unseasonably rainy weather had to be worked into the script, particularly during the balloons photo shoot scene. During filming of the Paris scenes, much of the crew and cast were on edge because of riots and political violence that were gripping the city. The soggy weather played havoc with the shooting of the wedding dress dance scene. Both Fred Astaire and Hepburn were continually slipping in the muddy and slippery grass. In &quot;Funny Face&quot; she was lucky enough to sing several songs. Her next full musical, My Fair Lady (1964), had her singing voice dubbed by Marni Nixon, much to Hepburn's disappointment. The face portrait unveiled in the darkroom scene was photographed by Richard Avedon. The film was shot back-to-back with Love in the Afternoon (1957).<br />
<br />
According to director William Friedkin, Audrey was Warner Bros. first choice for the role of Chris MacNeil in The Exorcist (1973) after her box-office successes with the studio's productions The Nun's Story (1959), My Fair Lady (1964) and Wait Until Dark (1967). She would only agree to star if the film were made in Rome, so that she would be able to remain home to raise her sons. Both Friedkin and writer William Peter Blatty rejected the proposal, and eventually cast Ellen Burstyn.<br />
<br />
Her performance as Holly Golightly in Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961) is ranked #32 on Premiere Magazine's 100 Greatest Performances of All Time (2006).<br />
<br />
Asked for the part of Emma Jacklin in The Turning Point (1977) but Anne Bancroft had already been cast in the role.<br />
<br />
Hepburn was diagnosed with appendiceal cancer on November 1, 1992 (not colon cancer, as it is often mistakenly called). The cancer spread into the lining of her small intestine. She had one foot of intestine removed in surgery and went through chemotherapy, but in a second surgery it was decided that the cancer had spread too far and could not be treated. Her son Sean H. Ferrer believes it had probably been developing over the course of the previous five years.<br />
<br />
From 1980 until her death, she lived together in Switzerland with her partner, Dutch actor Robert Wolders.<br />
<br />
The US Postal Service issued a 37 cent commemorative stamp honoring her as a Hollywood legend and humanitarian (2003).<br />
<br />
Her famous &quot;little black dress&quot; from Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961), designed by Hubert de Givenchy, was sold at a Christie's auction for approximately $920,000 (5 December 2006).<br />
<br />
Was voted &quot;most beautiful woman of all time&quot; by the readers of &quot;New Woman&quot; magazine (2006).<br />
<br />
Godmother of Victoria Brynner, the daughter of Doris Kleiner and Yul Brynner.<br />
<br />
Saved the life of her friend Capucine, who attempted suicide on several occasions.<br />
<br />
In Italy she was almost exclusively dubbed by Maria Pia Di Meo, except in her first two films (Roman Holiday (1953) (Vacanze Romane) and Sabrina (1954)) and in Green Mansions (1959) (Verdi dimore), where she was dubbed by Fiorella Betti.<br />
<br />
She was presented with her 1953 Best Actress Oscar for &quot;Roman Holiday&quot; by actor and humanitarian Jean Hersholt. Forty years later she would posthumously receive the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for her work with UNICEF.<br />
<br />
As of 2007, she and Katharine Hepburn are the only &quot;Best Actress&quot; Oscar-winners to share a last name. Of course, they are not related.<br />
<br />
Met future husband Mel Ferrer at a party hosted by Gregory Peck. It was Ferrer who sent Hepburn the script for &quot;Ondine&quot;, which Hepburn agreed to play on Broadway, in which the couple co-starred.<br />
<br />
Scottish writer A.J. Cronin was godfather of Sean H. Ferrer, her first child.<br />
<br />
Was friends with Eva Gabor.<br />
<br />
Once admitted that she would not have accepted the role of Eliza Dolittle in My Fair Lady (1964) if she had known that producer Jack L. Warner planned to have all of her singing dubbed.<br />
<br />
Hepburn was offered the role of a Japanese bride opposite Marlon Brando in Sayonara (1957) but turned it down. She later explained that she &quot;couldn't possibly play an Oriental. No one would believe me; they'd laugh. It's a lovely script, however, I know what I can and can't do. And if you did persuade me, you would regret it, because I would be terrible&quot;.<br />
<br />
Broke her back during filming of a horse-riding scene in The Unforgiven (1960).<br />
<br />
Won a 1968 Special Tony Award (New York City).<br />
<br />
Was considered for the part of Tony Gromeko in Doctor Zhivago (1965), but Geraldine Chaplin was cast instead.<br />
<br />
Was a close friend of French actress Capucine.<br />
<br />
Was a three-pack-a-day smoker.<br />
<br />
In December 1992, President George Bush presented her with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in recognition of her work for UNICEF. She did not attend the ceremony, due to being ill with cancer.<br />
<br />
Nearly married James (later Lord) Hanson, a businessman, after filming Roman Holiday (1953). An ivory satin wedding gown was designed by the Fontana sisters, but Hepburn called off the wedding at the last minute.<br />
<br />
Her last humanitarian mission for UNICEF was to Somalia in September 1992. She was reported to have begun experiencing stomach pains towards the end of the trip, leading to her cancer diagnosis, two months later.<br />
<br />
Returned to work nine months after giving birth to her son Sean H. Ferrer in order to begin filming Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961).<br />
<br />
Suffered from hydrophobia, a condition that severely hampered some of her scenes in Two for the Road (1967). When a shot called for co-star Albert Finney to throw Hepburn into a swimming pool, divers were placed on standby (off-camera) just to placate the actress after it was learned that she had a morbid fear of water.<br />
<br />
During his acceptance speech honoring her work for UNICEF, Sean H. Ferrer dedicated his mother's Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award to &quot;the children of the world&quot;.<br />
<br />
Is one of the only 12 people who are an EGOT, which means that she won at least one of all of the four major entertainment awards: Emmy, Grammy, Oscar and Tony. The other ones in chronological order are Richard Rodgers, Barbra Streisand, Helen Hayes, Rita Moreno, Liza Minnelli, John Gielgud, Marvin Hamlisch, Jonathan Tunick, Mel Brooks, Mike Nichols and Whoopi Goldberg. Streisand, however, won a Special Tony Award, not a competitive one, and Minnelli won a Special Grammy.<br />
<br />
She donated all the salaries she earned for her final projects to UNICEF (Love Among Thieves (1987) (TV), Always (1989), and &quot;Gardens of the World with Audrey Hepburn&quot; (1993)).<br />
<br />
Art was one of her longtime hobbies, she drew pictures of stories when she was a child to distract herself from chronic hunger pains during WWII. As an adult, she took up painting to pass time while pregnant with her son, Luca. Samples of her work can be seen in the book &quot;Audrey Hepburn: An Elegant Spirit&quot;.<br />
<br />
In addition to her first son Sean H. Ferrer, Hepburn became pregnant another four times by her husband Mel Ferrer (in 1954, 1958, 1965, and 1967). However, she suffered miscarriages on all of those occasions. She fell pregnant twice with Dr. Andrea Dotti; giving birth in 1970 to her second son, Luca, but miscarried in 1974.<br />
<br />
Is one of twelve actresses to have won the Triple Crown of Acting (an Oscar, Emmy and Tony); the others in chronological order are Helen Hayes, Ingrid Bergman, Shirley Booth, Liza Minnelli, Rita Moreno, Maureen Stapleton, Jessica Tandy, Anne Bancroft, Vanessa Redgrave, Maggie Smith and Ellen Burstyn.<br />
<br />
Ranked #82 in Men's Health 100 Hottest Women of All Time (2011).<br />
<br />
She auditioned for, and did a costume test for, the role of Lygia in Quo Vadis (1951), but M-G-M turned her down because she was too unknown at the time and went with Deborah Kerr.<br />
<br />
When Hepburn was in the final stages of her illness, the press took pictures of her while she was at home, and published the photos, much to the disapproval of everyone who knew her.<br />
<br />
While working in a minor movie, Monte Carlo Baby (1953), in Monaco in 1951, Hepburn was spotted by novelist Colette, who deemed her the ideal choice to play the title role in the upcoming Broadway version of her play &quot;Gigi.&quot; Although she lacked experience and confidence, she ultimately got the part.<br />
<br />
She never singled out any of her films as a favorite, but often spoke fondly of Roman Holiday (1953), Funny Face (1957), The Nun's Story (1959), and Charade (1963) in interviews. She reportedly did not enjoy working on The Unforgiven (1960) due to injuries sustained while shooting, and Wait Until Dark (1967) from the stress of her failing marriage. She was said to have also disappointed with the results of Paris When It Sizzles (1964) and Bloodline (1979). Nonetheless, she had a great reputation for her professionalism and almost always got along well with her co-stars and directors.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Mini Biography</u></b><br />
Audrey Hepburn was born on May 4, 1929 in Brussels, Belgium. She really was blue-blood from the beginning with her father, a wealthy English banker, and her mother, a Dutch baroness. After her parents divorced, Audrey went to London with her mother where she went to a private girls school. Later, when her mother moved back to the Netherlands, she attended private schools as well. While vacationing with her mother in Arnhem, Netherlands, Hitler's army took over the town. It was here that she fell on hard times during the Nazi occupation. Audrey suffered from depression and malnutrition. After the liberation, Audrey went to a ballet school in London on a scholarship and later began a modeling career. As a model, she was graceful and, it seemed, she had found her niche in life - until the film producers came calling. After being spotted modeling by a producer, she was signed to a bit part in the European film Dutch in Seven Lessons (1948) in 1948. Later, she had a speaking role in the 1951 film, Young Wives' Tale (1951) as Eve Lester. The part still wasn't much, so she headed to America to try her luck there. Audrey gained immediate prominence in the US with her role in Roman Holiday (1953) in 1953. This film turned out to be a smashing success as she won an Oscar as Best Actress. This gained her enormous popularity and more plum roles. One of the reasons for her popularity was the fact that she was so elf-like and had class, unlike the sex-goddesses of the time. Roman Holiday (1953) was followed by another similarly wonderful performance in the 1957 classic Funny Face (1957). Sabrina (1954), in 1954, for which she received another Academy nomination, and Love in the Afternoon (1957), in 1957, also garnered rave reviews. In 1959, she received yet another nomination for her role in The Nun's Story (1959). Audrey reached the pinnacle of her career when she played Holly Golightly in the delightful film Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961) in 1961. For this she received another nomination. She scored commercial success again in the espionage caper Charade (1963). One of Audrey's most radiant roles was in the fine production of My Fair Lady (1964) in 1964. Her co-star, Rex Harrison, once was asked to identify his favorite leading lady. Without hesitation, he replied, &quot;Audrey Hepburn in 'My Fair Lady.'&quot; After a couple of other movies, most notably Two for the Road (1967), she hit pay dirt and another nomination in 1967's Wait Until Dark (1967). By the end of the sixties, after her divorce from actor Mel Ferrer, Audrey decided to retire while she was on top. Later she married Dr. Andrea Dotti. From time to time, she would appear on the silver screen. One film of note was Robin and Marian (1976), with Sean Connery in 1976. In 1988, Audrey became a special ambassador to the United Nations UNICEF fund helping children in Latin America and Africa, a position she retained until 1993. She was named to People's magazine as one of the 50 most beautiful people in the world. Her last film was Always (1989) in 1989. Audrey Hepburn died on January 20, 1993 in Tolochnaz, Switzerland, from appendicular cancer. She had made a total of 31 high quality movies. Her elegance and style will always be remembered in film history as evidenced by her being named in Empire magazine's &quot;The Top 100 Movie Stars of All Time.&quot;<br />
IMDb Mini Biography By: Denny Jackson <br />
<br />
<b><u>Personal Quotes</u></b><br />
I never thought I'd land in pictures with a face like mine.<br />
<br />
I was asked to act when I couldn't act. I was asked to sing &quot;Funny Face&quot; when I couldn't sing and dance with Fred Astaire when I couldn't dance - and do all kinds of things I wasn't prepared for. Then I tried like mad to cope with it.<br />
<br />
Remember, if you ever need a helping hand, it's at the end of your arm. As you get older, remember you have another hand: the first is to help yourself, the second is to help others.<br />
<br />
I was born with an enormous need for affection, and a terrible need to give it.<br />
<br />
My own life has been much more than a fairy tale. I've had my share of difficult moments, but whatever difficulties I've gone through, I've always gotten a prize at the end.<br />
<br />
For me, the only things of interest are those linked to the heart.<br />
<br />
I never think of myself as an icon. What is in other people's minds is not in my mind. I just do my thing.<br />
<br />
I probably hold the distinction of being one movie star who, by all laws of logic, should never have made it. At each stage of my career, I lacked the experience.<br />
<br />
My look is attainable. Women can look like Audrey Hepburn by flipping out their hair, buying the large sunglasses, and the little sleeveless dresses.<br />
<br />
Success is like reaching an important birthday and finding you're exactly the same.<br />
<br />
I know I have more sex appeal on the tip of my nose than many women in their entire bodies. It doesn't stand out a mile, but it's there.<br />
<br />
[talking about a severe coughing attack she had when she was six weeks old, slowly turning blue and finally stopping breathing until her mother's prayers and spanking brought her back to life] If I were to write a biography, it would start like this: I was born in Brussels, Belgium, on May 4, 1929 . . . and I died six weeks later.<br />
<br />
[about her &quot;comeback&quot; in 1976] Whatever happens, the most important thing is growing old gracefully. And you can't do that on the cover of a fan magazine.<br />
<br />
It's that wonderful old-fashioned idea that others come first and you come second. This was the whole ethic by which I was brought up. Others matter more than you do, so 'don't fuss, dear; get on with it.'<br />
<br />
[on filming Funny Face (1957), while coping with extreme Paris weather and a grumpy co-star] Here I've been waiting for 20 years to dance with 'Fred Astaire', and what do I get? Mud in my eye!<br />
<br />
I think sex is overrated. I don't have sex appeal and I know it. As a matter of fact, I think I'm rather funny looking. My teeth are funny, for one thing, and I have none of the attributes usually required for a movie queen, including the shapeliness.<br />
<br />
You can't let yourself worry when you play a classic role. I'm an introvert anyway. Playing the extroverted girl in Breakfast at Tiffany's was the hardest thing I ever did. If I had stopped to think about comparison with my predecessors as Eliza, I'd have frozen completely. But I loved this part. Eliza is vulnerable, but she has a beautiful inner strength. I made myself forget the problems. I threw myself into it and tried to make it me.<br />
<br />
I understood the dismay of people who had seen Julie on Broadway. Julie made that role her own, and for that reason I didn't want to do the film when it was first offered. But Jack Warner never wanted to put Julie in the film. He was totally opposed to it, for whatever reason. Then I learned that if I turned it down, they would offer it to still another movie actress. So I felt I should have the same opportunity to play it as any other film actress. - On My Fair Lady (1964).<br />
<br />
You can even say that I hated myself at certain periods. I was too fat, or maybe too tall, or maybe just plain too ugly ... you can say my definiteness stems from underlying feelings of insecurity and inferiority. I couldn't conquer these feelings by acting indecisive. I found the only way to get the better of them was by adopting a forceful, concentrated drive.<br />
<br />
[on &quot;The Diary of Anne Frank&quot;] I was given the book in Dutch, in galley form, in 1946 by a friend. I read it...and it destroyed me. It does this to many people when they first read it but I was not reading it as a book, as printed pages. This was my life. I didn't know what I was going to read. I've never been the same again, it affected me so deeply.<br />
<br />
When I've made about 70 films and the public still wants me, then I shall think of myself as a star.<br />
<br />
Only the absolutely determined people succeed.<br />
<br />
Salary<br />
Roman Holiday (1953) 	$12,500<br />
Sabrina (1954) 	$15,000<br />
War and Peace (1956) 	$350,000<br />
&quot;Producers' Showcase&quot; (1954) 	$150,000<br />
Funny Face (1957) 	$150,000<br />
The Nun's Story (1959) 	$250,000 + 10% of gross<br />
The Unforgiven (1960) 	$200,000<br />
Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961) 	$750,000<br />
My Fair Lady (1964) 	$1.1 million<br />
How to Steal a Million (1966) 	$750,000<br />
Two for the Road (1967) 	$750,000<br />
Wait Until Dark (1967) 	$750,000 +10% of profits<br />
Robin and Marian (1976) 	$1,000,000<br />
Bloodline (1979) 	$1,000,000 + % of gross<br />
Always (1989) 	$1,000,000<br />
<br />
<b><u><font size="3">Filmography</font></u></b><br />
<br />
<b><u> Actress </u></b><br />
1989 Always...Hap<br />
 1987 Love Among Thieves (TV movie)...Baroness Caroline DuLac<br />
 1981 They All Laughed...Angela Niotes<br />
 1979 Bloodline...Elizabeth Roffe<br />
 1976 Robin and Marian...Maid Marian<br />
 1967 Wait Until Dark...Susy Hendrix<br />
 1967 Two for the Road...Joanna Wallace<br />
 1966 How to Steal a Million...Nicole<br />
 1964 My Fair Lady...Eliza Doolittle<br />
 1964 Paris When It Sizzles...Gabrielle Simpson / Gaby<br />
 1963 Charade...Regina Lampert<br />
 1961 The Children's Hour...Karen Wright<br />
 1961 Breakfast at Tiffany's...Holly Golightly<br />
 1960 The Unforgiven...Rachel Zachary<br />
 1959 The Nun's Story...Sister Luke (Gabrielle van der Mal)<br />
 1959 Green Mansions...Rima<br />
 1957 Love in the Afternoon...Ariane Chavasse / Thin Girl<br />
 1957 Funny Face...Jo Stockton<br />
 1957 Producers' Showcase (TV series)&#8211; Mayerling (1957) &#8230; Marie Vetsera<br />
 1956 War and Peace...Natasha Rostova<br />
 1954 Sabrina...Sabrina Fairchild<br />
 1953 Monte Carlo Baby...Linda Farrel<br />
 1953 Roman Holiday...Princess Ann<br />
 1952 CBS Television Workshop (TV series)&#8211; Rainy Day in Paradise Junction (1952)<br />
 1952 Secret People...Nora Brentano<br />
 1951 Baby Beats the Band...Melissa Walter<br />
 1951 Young Wives' Tale...Eve Lester<br />
 1951 BBC Sunday-Night Theatre (TV series)&#8211; The Silent Village (1951) &#8230; Celia<br />
 1951 The Lavender Hill Mob...Chiquita<br />
 1951 Laughter in Paradise...Frieda - Cigarette girl<br />
 1951 One Wild Oat...Hotel receptionist <br />
<br />
<b><u>Soundtrack </u></b><br />
2012 Banda sonora (TV series)<br />
&#8211; Episode #8.4 (2012) (performer: &quot;Moon River&quot;)<br />
 <br />
2010 20 to 1 (TV series documentary)<br />
&#8211; Our All Time Favourite Films (2010) (performer: &quot;Wouldn't It Be Loverly&quot; - uncredited)<br />
<br />
 2009 Johnny Mercer: The Dream's on Me (TV documentary) (performer: &quot;Moon River&quot;)<br />
 <br />
2006 Gilmore Girls (TV series)<br />
&#8211; 'S Wonderful, 'S Marvelous (2006) (performer: &quot;'S Wonderful&quot; - uncredited)<br />
 <br />
1991 Great Performances (TV series)<br />
&#8211; The Fred Astaire Songbook (1991) (performer: &quot;He Loves and She Loves&quot;, &quot;'s Wonderful&quot;)<br />
 <br />
1991 Here's Looking at You, Warner Bros. (TV documentary) (performer: &quot;The Rain in Spain&quot; - uncredited)<br />
 <br />
1981 The American Film Institute Salute to Fred Astaire (TV documentary) (performer: &quot;S'Wonderful&quot;)<br />
 <br />
1964 My Fair Lady (performer: &quot;Why Can't the English?&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;Wouldn't It Be Loverly&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;Just You Wait&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;The Rain in Spain&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;I Could Have Danced All Night&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;You Did It&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;Just You Wait Reprise&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;Show Me&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;The Flower Market&quot; 1956 - uncredited, &quot;Without You&quot; 1956 - uncredited)<br />
 <br />
1961 Breakfast at Tiffany's (performer: &quot;Moon River&quot; 1961)<br />
<br />
 1957 Funny Face (performer: &quot;Funny Face&quot;, &quot;How Long Has This Been Going On?&quot;, &quot;Bonjour, Paris!&quot;, &quot;He Loves and She Loves&quot;, &quot;On How to Be Lovely&quot;, &quot;'S Wonderful&quot;)<br />
<br />
 1954 Sabrina (performer: &quot;La vie en rose&quot; - uncredited, &quot;Yes! We Have No Bananas&quot; - uncredited)</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=64">Screen Legends</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6378</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>John Wayne Picture Game #372</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6377&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 03:39:45 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[Hello Gang!  
 
Don't forget to *vote* on the last game. It's easy, just click  here ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><font size="2">Hello Gang! <br />
<br />
Don't forget to <font size="7"><font color="Red"><b>vote</b></font></font> on the last game. It's easy, just click <a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?john-wayne-picture-game-371-a-6363.html" target="_blank"> here </a> and chose a winner. Then, come back and vote!<br />
<br />
The winner of game #370 is...<br />
<br />
<font size="4"><font color="Green"><b>ethanedwards</b></font></font>. :))): <br />
<br />
Now. on to the next game. Take a look at the picture below and post a funny comment. Have fun with it!</font><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3731" >Attachment 3731</a></div>


	<div style="padding:10px">

	

	

	
		<fieldset class="fieldset">
			<legend>Attached Images</legend>
			<ul>
			<li>
	<img class="inlineimg" src="/jpg.gif" alt="File Type: jpg" />
	<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3731&amp;d=1368416254">&#73;&#110;&#72;&#97;&#114;&#109;&#115;&#87;&#97;&#121;&#52;&#95;&#122;&#112;&#115;&#48;&#51;&#5.jpg</a> 
(72.0 KB)
</li> 
			</ul>
			</fieldset>
	

	

	</div>
 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13">John Wayne Picture Game</category>
			<dc:creator>dukefan1</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6377</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>(New Profile- Stuntman) Pals Of The Saddle- Terry Leonard</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6376&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 May 2013 15:49:08 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*TERRY LEONARD* 
 
Image:...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><b><font size="6"><font color="Blue">TERRY LEONARD</font></font></b><br />
<br />
<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/terry-leonard-3rd-annual-taurus-world-stunt-awards-arrivals-RAzAwi_zpsc47fedab.jpg" border="0" alt="" />..<img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/john-wayne/images_zps65acfe4c.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
Information from IMDB<br />
<br />
Date of Birth<br />
c. 1941<br />
<br />
Height<br />
6' 1&quot; (1.85 m)<br />
<br />
Spouse<br />
Teri Garland 	(? - ?) (divorced)<br />
<br />
<b><u>Trivia</u></b><br />
Father of Malosi Leonard.<br />
Father of Matt Leonard.<br />
Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association (PRCA). Team Roper.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Mini- Biography</u></b><br />
Terry J. Leonard is a stunt man, actor and director. <br />
In his career he doubled for <b>John Wayne,</b> Richard Harris, Robert Mitchum, <br />
Harrison Ford, and Sean Connery.<br />
 He's credited as Second Unit Director for &quot;The Substitute&quot;<br />
 in the Lost on Location featurette for that episode; <br />
he also appears in the featurette for &quot;Happily Ever After&quot;, <br />
coordinating the car dive scene with assistant director Wainani Young-Tomich. <br />
<br />
<b><u><font size="3">Filmography</font></u></b><br />
<br />
<b><u>Stunts </u></b><br />
2012 People Like Us (stunt driver)<br />
 2011 Bad Teacher (stunts)<br />
 2011 The Green Hornet (stunts)<br />
 2010 Due Date (stunts)<br />
 2010 Inception (stunts) <br />
2008 Soul Men (stunt coordinator: Los Angeles)<br />
 2007 Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (stunts - as Terry Leonard)<br />
 2007 Death Proof (stunts)<br />
 2006 The Hard Easy (stunt double: Bruce Dern)<br />
 2006 The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2006 Firewall (fight coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2005 Transporter 2 (stunt player)<br />
 2004 The Last Shot (stunts)<br />
 2004 The Forgotten (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2004 The Last Ride (TV movie) (stunts)<br />
 2003 2 Fast 2 Furious (stunt coordinator: second unit)<br />
 2003 Six Feet Under (TV series) (stunt coordinator - 1 episode)– I'm Sorry, I'm Lost (2003) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 2002 Robbery Homicide Division (TV series) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 2002 The Sum of All Fears (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2001 Impostor (stunt coordinator)<br />
 2001 Road Kill (stunt coordinator)<br />
 2000 The Fugitive (TV series) (stunt coordinator - 1 episode)– Pilot (2000) (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1999 Wild Wild West (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1998 Mighty Joe (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1998 Rush Hour (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1997 Best Men (stunts - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1997 Rough Riders (TV movie) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1996 My Fellow Americans (stunts - as Terry J. Leonard) <br />
1995 Die Hard: With a Vengeance (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1995 The Quick and the Dead (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1993 Tombstone (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1993 The Fugitive (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1993 Lifepod (TV movie) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1993 Super Mario Bros. (stunts)<br />
 1993 Space Rangers (TV series) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1992 Buffy the Vampire Slayer (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1992 Patriot Games (stunts - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1992 Far and Away (stunts - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1991 Showdown in Little Tokyo (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1991 Delirious (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1991 Backdraft (stunts - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1991 Flight of the Intruder (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1990 The Rookie (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1990/I Revenge (stunt coordinator, stunts)<br />
 1990 Downtown (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1990 Why Me? (stunt double: Bruno)<br />
 1989 The Package (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1989 Farewell to the King (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1988 Iron Eagle II (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1987 No Man's Land (stunts - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1987 Dragnet (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1984-1986 Hunter (TV series) (stunt coordinator - 26 episodes)<br />
– True Confessions (1986) (stunt coordinator)<br />
– Think Blue (1985) (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
– Rape and Revenge: Part 2 (1985) (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
– Rape and Revenge: Part 1 (1985) (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
– Killer in a Halloween Mask (1985) (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
In all 26 episodes »<br />
 1986 Deadly Friend (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1986 Cobra (stunt coordinator, stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1985 Clue (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1984 Starman (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1984 Red Dawn (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1984 Gremlins (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1984 Streets of Fire (stunts)<br />
 1984 Romancing the Stone (stunt coordinator: second unit, waterfall stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1983 Christine (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1983 A Killer in the Family (TV movie) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1983 Easy Money (racetrack stunt coordinator, stunts)<br />
 1983 Blue Thunder (stunt coordinator - uncredited, stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1982 48 Hrs. (stunt double - uncredited)<br />
 1982 Class of 1984 (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1982 Highpoint (stunts)<br />
 1982 Hammett (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1982 Conan the Barbarian (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard, stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1981 The Fall Guy (TV series) (stunts)<br />
 1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark (stunt double: Indiana Jones #2 - uncredited, stunts)<br />
 1981 The Legend of the Lone Ranger (stunts)<br />
 1980 Used Cars (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1980 My Bodyguard (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1980 The Blues Brothers (stunts)<br />
 1980 The Mountain Men (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1980 The Long Riders (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1980 Superstunt II (TV movie) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1979 1941 (stunt coordinator, stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1979 Apocalypse Now (stunt coordinator - as Terry J. Leonard, stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1979 Firepower (stunt coordinator, stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1978 The Norseman (stunts)<br />
 1978 Centennial (TV mini-series) (stunts)<br />
 1978 Circle of Iron (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1978 FM (stunt policeman)<br />
 1978 Thaddeus Rose and Eddie (TV movie) (stunt driver)<br />
 1976 The Return of a Man Called Horse (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1976 Death Journey (stunts)<br />
1975 Breakheart Pass (stunts)<br />
 1975 Return to Macon County (stunt coordinator) <br />
1975 Night Moves (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1975 The Wind and the Lion (stunt supervisor)<br />
 1974 Earthquake (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1974 Nightmare Honeymoon (stunts)<br />
 1974 Call Harry Crown (stunt double - uncredited)<br />
 1974 Black Samson (stunts)<br />
 1974 Mr. Majestyk (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1974 Blazing Saddles (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1973 The Deadly Trackers (stunt double - uncredited)<br />
 1973 Dillinger (stunt coordinator - uncredited, stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1973 Cleopatra Jones (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1973 Class of '44 (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1973 The Train Robbers (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1972 The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1972 Hec Ramsey (TV series) (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1972 Search Control (TV series) (stunts)<br />
 1972 The Wrath of God (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1971 McMillan &amp; Wife (TV series) (stunt double - 1 episode– Once Upon a Dead Man (1971) (stunt double - uncredited)<br />
<b> 1971 Big Jake (stunts - uncredited)</b><br />
 1970 Never Give an Inch (stunts - uncredited)<br />
<b> 1970 Rio Lobo (stunts - uncredited)</b><br />
 1970 Monte Walsh (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1970 Cover Me Babe (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1970 Soldier Blue (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1970 Barquero (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1970 Beneath the Planet of the Apes (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1970 A Man Called Horse (stunt coordinator)<br />
 1969 Che! (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1969 Hard Contract (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1969 100 Rifles (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1969 Mackenna's Gold (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1968 Planet of the Apes (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1967 Hombre (stunts - uncredited)<br />
<b> 1966 El Dorado (stunts - uncredited)<br />
 1963 McLintock! (stunts - uncredited)</b><br />
 <br />
<b><u>Second Unit Director or Assistant Director </u></b><br />
2013 Gangster Squad (second unit director)<br />
 2011 Cowboys &amp; Aliens (second unit director)<br />
 2010 The Expendables (second unit director)<br />
 2009 Fast &amp; Furious (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2006 The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2006 Date Movie (second unit director)<br />
 2004 The Forgotten (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2003 2 Fast 2 Furious (second unit director)<br />
 2003 Agent Cody Banks (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2002 The Sum of All Fears (aerial crew director: Montreal)<br />
 2001 Road Kill (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 2001 American Outlaws (second unit director)<br />
 2000 The Fugitive (TV series) (second unit director - 1 episode)– Pilot (2000) (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1999 Wild Wild West (second unit director)<br />
 1998 Mighty Joe (second unit director)<br />
 1998 Rush Hour (second unit director)<br />
 1998 The Horse Whisperer (second unit director: Saratoga Springs)<br />
 1996 Eraser (second unit director)<br />
 1995 Money Train (second unit director: Los Angeles)<br />
 1995 Die Hard: With a Vengeance (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1995 The Quick and the Dead (second unit director)<br />
 1994 Maverick (second unit director)<br />
 1993 Tombstone (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1993 The Fugitive (second unit director: North Carolina - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1993 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III (additional second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1992 Buffy the Vampire Slayer (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1991 Showdown in Little Tokyo (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1991 Delirious (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1991 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Secret of the Ooze (second unit director)<br />
 1991 Flight of the Intruder (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1990 Downtown (second unit director)<br />
 1989 The Package (second unit director)<br />
 1989 Farewell to the King (second unit director)<br />
 1988 Moving (second unit director)<br />
 1987 Dragnet (second unit director)<br />
 1986 Cobra (second unit director)<br />
 1984-1985 Hunter (TV series) (second unit director - 16 episodes)<br />
– Night of the Dragons (1985) (second unit director)<br />
– The Last Kill (1985) (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
– The Beach Boy (1985) (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
– The Snow Queen: Part 2 (1985) (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
– The Snow Queen: Part 1 (1985) (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
In all 16 episodes »<br />
 1984 Red Dawn (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1984 Romancing the Stone (second unit director)<br />
 1983 Blue Thunder (second unit director: stunt)<br />
 1982 Conan the Barbarian (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1980 Used Cars (second unit director - as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1978 Big Wednesday (second unit director: land)<br />
 <br />
<b><u>Actor</u></b> <br />
2012 On the Road...Pecos Truck Driver<br />
 2004 Life on Liberty Street (TV movie)...Bus Driver<br />
 2001 Road Kill...Bartender<br />
 1983 Blue Thunder...Assault Man 2 (uncredited)<br />
 1982 Voyagers! (TV series)– Created Equal (1982) … Guard #3 (as Terry J. Leonard)<br />
 1982 T.J. Hooker (TV series)– Hooker's War (1982) … Demon (uncredited)<br />
 1982 The Fall Guy (TV series)– Ladies on the Ropes (1982) … Gil<br />
 1982 Death Wish II...Sniper in Tree (uncredited)<br />
 1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark...Driver of German Truck (uncredited)<br />
 1981 The Legend of the Lone Ranger...Valentine<br />
 1980 Inside Moves...Lucius' Man<br />
 1980 The Mountain Men...Crow Brave<br />
 1979 Beach Patrol (TV movie)<br />
 1978 The Lord of the Rings<br />
 1974-1977 The Six Million Dollar Man (TV series)<br />
Stoner / Thug / Vincent<br />
– The Cheshire Project (1977) … Stoner<br />
– Look Alike (1975) … Thug (uncredited)<br />
– Dr. Wells Is Missing (1974) … Vincent<br />
 1977 Exo-Man (TV movie) (uncredited)<br />
 1976 The Rockford Files (TV series)– Coulter City Wildcat (1976) … Ed (uncredited)<br />
 1976 The Quest (TV series)– The Captive (1976) … Curly<br />
 1976 Death Journey...Thug<br />
 1975 The Wind and the Lion...President Roosevelt's Sparring Partner (uncredited)<br />
 1974 Black Samson...Samson's Street People<br />
 1974 Hec Ramsey (TV series)– Scar Tissue (1974) … Guard (uncredited)<br />
 1973 The Deadly Trackers...Deputy (uncredited)<br />
 1973 Slaughter's Big Rip-Off...Thug (uncredited)<br />
 1973 Dillinger...Theodore 'Handsome Jack' Klutas (uncredited)<br />
 1972-1973 Search Control (TV series)<br />
Burke / Montalambert<br />
– The Mattson Papers (1973) … Burke<br />
– Live Men Tell Tales (1972) … Montalambert<br />
 1972 The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean...Outlaw<br />
 1970 Never Give an Inch...Bit Part<br />
 1970 Barquero...Hawk<br />
 1970 A Man Called Horse...Striking Bear<br />
 1968 The Wild Wild West (TV series)– The Night of the Underground Terror (1968) … Cope</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34">Pals of the Saddle- Cowboys</category>
			<dc:creator>ethanedwards</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6376</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Erreur 400</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6375&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 May 2013 06:16:34 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>:wink_smile: 
 
For the five films linking Maureen to Duke, unable to open the page of the movie by clicking on the shortcut set that I really do not...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>:wink_smile:<br />
<br />
For the five films linking Maureen to Duke, unable to open the page of the movie by clicking on the shortcut set that I really do not know the interest!<br />
<br />
<img src="http://www.archive-host.com/link/daa056828c71a19201f47072064156d5b57600db.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=40">Message Board Issues and/or Errors</category>
			<dc:creator>Romy</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6375</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>An excellent article NOT political--but is about guns and collectors.</title>
			<link>http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6374&amp;goto=newpost</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 May 2013 00:33:39 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>_*This article is NOT political and is basically one News writer who is Pro-Gun and he tries to explain civially--why people like me--and others...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><font color="Red"><u><i><b>This article is NOT political and is basically one News writer who is Pro-Gun and he tries to explain civially--why people like me--and others here-are pro-2nd Amendment.<br />
<br />
</b></i></u></font><br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank"> May 10, 2013  Iowa State Daily AD - Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photo  Posted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.  By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.com  Along with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.    To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come.   Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today.   But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation.   We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section.   It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.  The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.  No experience necessary  In the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.    But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.  That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.  I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.  You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.    Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.  How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.  Death by a thousand cuts  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.    Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.  Truth, treason and the empire of lies  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.  We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.    Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.  A dangerous servant and fearful master  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.  Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.  </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?  Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.  Do unto others  No, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.  We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.  So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?  Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we're anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.  No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.    Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.  I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.  I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.    And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!  An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.  You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.  Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dukewayne.com/Contact | About | Subscribe | Advertise | ApplyWelcome!Login|Signup May 10, 2013Iowa State Daily AD - Dahls Weather Sponsor Cloudy 65° Cloudyhome news opinion sports blogs special sections games &amp; contests marketplace living calendar tvAdvanced SearchHome OpinionSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burnedStory Comments (55) Image (2)Print Create a hardcopy of this pageFont Size: Default font sizeLarger font size 960 Previous Next GunsPhoto: Barry Snell/Iowa State Daily Buy this photoPosted: Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 11:01 am, Fri May 10, 2013.By Barry Snell, barry.snell@iowastatedaily.comAlong with bombs and bombers, guns seem to be all the media wants to talk about these days. Death is sexy to our miscreant media, especially when people are killed on purpose. And when that happens, it’s all the newspapers and news stations will print and broadcast, in turn making these events appear worse than they are in reality.To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between the Texas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come. Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment. Recent studies have shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, are less informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, what with all the opinion you’ll find in news today. But when it comes to something as deadly serious as guns and crime, Americans can’t afford the media hyperbole, misinformation and disinformation. We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through the last few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section. It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in 2011 and early 2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.The desire of others for me to write gun columns is reasonable, though, and I understand it. I’m as much of a “gun expert” as you’re likely to find around here, so having me write about guns in the paper is perfectly rational. I won’t bore you with my “gun resume,” but suffice it to say that prior to coming to Iowa State in 2011, I made a living with firearms in one way or another for several years of my life, and have a few pieces of paper laying around that say I know a bit about them, too.Today, however, I’m going to break my silence on the gun issue and speak out once more — and for the last time. This is my final column for the Iowa State Daily.No experience necessaryIn the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue, opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.But all the pro-gun people I know are normal people too — people so normal that nobody knows they’re gun people until they’re told. In fact, there are so many gun owners that if we are all crazy like some suggest, the daily crime rate in America would look more like our crime rate for the entire decade combined, and CNN would actually have something to report on other than the latest gossip.That is to say, there’s a hundred million of us, owning a few hundred million guns combined, and we contribute to society peacefully every day. Many of us even literally protect society for a living, or used to.I’ve come to realize after the Sandy Hook shooting that the reason we can’t have a rational gun debate is because the anti-gun side pre-supposes that their pro-gun opponents must first accept that guns are bad in order to have a discussion about guns in the first place. Before we even start the conversation, we’re the bad guys and we have to admit it. Without accepting that guns are bad and supplicating themselves to the anti-gunner, the pro-gunner can’t get a word in edgewise, and is quickly reduced to being called a murderer, or a low, immoral and horrible human being.You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, from Piers Morgan to the Des Moines Register’s own Donald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube is full of examples, and any Google search will result in example after example of gun-owning Americans being lampooned, ridiculed and demonized by the media and citizens somewhere.Hell, it’s even gotten so bad that a little kid was expelled from school recently for biting a Pop Tart into the vague shape of a handgun during lunch break (it looked more like Idaho to me).Liberals always make the common plea, “We need to get some experts to solve this problem!” for any public policy issue that comes along, which is a good thing. But when it comes to the gun issue, gun expertise is completely irrelevant to the anti-gunner — people who probably have never fired a gun or even touched one in real life, and whose only experience with guns is what they’ve seen in movies or read about in bastions of (un)balanced, hyper-liberal journalism, like Mother Jones. That a pro-gun person might actually know a lot about their hobby or profession doesn’t stand up against the histrionic cries of the anti-gunner.How can we “gun people” honestly be expected to come to the table with anti-gunners when anti-gunners are willfully stupid about guns, and openly hate, despise and ridicule those of us who own them? There must first be respect and trust — even just a little — before there can be even the beginnings of legitimate discussion of the issue.Death by a thousand cutsGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how they respect the hunting traditions of America. We don’t trust you because you have to be a complete idiot to think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they say gun control is about crime control. Anti-gunners claim that ending crime and “saving children” is why they want to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Yet our very own government says that assault weapons are used in less than two percent of all gun crimes and Department of Justice studies say the last assault weapons ban had little or no effect on crime. Other studies suggest gun control may even make crime worse (one need only look to high crime rates in places where there’s a lot of gun control to see the possible connection).Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when it comes to their “We need gun control to save the children” argument, many of us can’t understand how an anti-gun liberal can simultaneously be in favor of abortion. Because you know, a ban on abortion would save a child every single time. I’m personally not rabidly against abortion, but the discongruence makes less sense still when the reason abortions are legal is to protect a woman’s individual rights. That’s great, but does the individual rights argument sound familiar? Anti-gunners think that for some bizarre reason, the founding fathers happened to stick a collective right smack dab at the top of a list of individual rights, though. Yeah, because that makes sense.Truth, treason and the empire of liesGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they are purposely misleading to rile the emotions of the ignorant. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they say more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns — a fact that is technically true, but the key piece of information withheld is that only a minor fraction of that number is murder; the majority is suicides and accidents. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know accidents and suicides don’t count in the crime rate, but they’re held against us as if they do.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because suicide is the only human-inflicted leading cause of death in America, and that violent crime has been on the decline for decades. We also know that 10 people die daily in drownings, 87 people die daily by poisoning, more than 20,000 adults die from falls each year, someone dies in a fire every 169 minutes, nearly 31,000 people are killed in car accidents annually and almost 2,000 are stabbed to death. People even kill each other with hammers. Yet fewer than 14,000 people are killed by guns of any kind each year.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because not only is the violent crime rate approaching historic lows, but mass shootings are on the decline too.We don’t trust anti-gun people because they fail to recognize that mass shootings happen where guns are already banned — ridiculous “gun-free zones” which attract homicidal maniacs to perpetrate their mass shootings.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because school shootings have been happening forever, but despite them being on the decline, the media inflates the issue until the perception is that they’re a bigger problem than they really are. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re busy riling up the emotions of the ignorant, who in turn direct their ire upon us, demonizing us because we object to the overreaction and focus on the wrong things, like the mentally ill people committing the crimes.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they look down on us for defending the Second Amendment as vigorously as they defend the First Amendment — a fight we too would stand side-by-side with them on otherwise. We don’t trust anti-gunners because someone defending the First Amendment is considered a hero, but a someone defending the Second Amendment is figured down with murderers and other lowlifes. Where the First Amendment has its very own day and week, both near-holy national celebrations beyond reproach, anti-gunners would use the First Amendment to ridicule any equivalent event for the Second Amendment, like they did for a recent local attempt at the University of Iowa.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gun people put us down with dismissals like “just another dumb redneck with a gun.” We are told all over the Internet that we deserve to be in prison for being awful, heartless people; baby-killers and supporters of domestic terrorism, even. We don’t trust anti-gun people because even our own president says people like me are “bitter” and “cling to our guns and religion.” One need only go to any online comments section of any recent gun article in any of the major newspapers to see all this for themselves.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they seek to punish us for crimes we didn’t commit. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that the 100 million of us are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who love this country and our society as much as the next liberal. Yet when one previously convicted felon murders someone with a stolen gun five days after his release from prison, or things like the Newtown shooting happen, guns are blamed — and therefore lawful gun owners too, as there is guilt by association, apparently.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because when things like the Boston Marathon bombing happen, everyone correctly blames the bomber, not the bomb. Nobody is calling for bomb control because killing people with bombs is already illegal — just like killing people with guns is illegal too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they’re fine with guns protecting the money in our banks, our politicians and our celebrities, but they’re against us using guns to protect ourselves, our families, or even our children in schools. Legislative trolls like Dianne Feinstein cry havoc about me protecting my life, while standing comfortably behind armed guards —and the .38 Special revolver she got a California carry permit for. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they tell us our lives aren’t important, or at least are less important than the life of some celebrity like Snooki, who can have all the armed guards her bank account can afford.A dangerous servant and fearful masterGun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they completely ignore the fact that true conservatism is about, in part, the preservation of traditions and long-standing principles. We don’t trust anti-gunners because the American Revolution was kicked off by an attempt at gun control when the British marched to Concord to seize the colonists’ muskets and powder. Since the shot heard ‘round the world was fired on Lexington Green, the possession of a firearm has been the mark and symbol of a citizen, distinguishing them from a subject of a monarchy or tyrannical government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they prefer the post-modern world where anything means anything, and they therefore don’t understand the power of or need for the preservation of traditions — or at least, ones of which they don’t personally approve.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because in a single breath they tell us that the Second Amendment is irrelevant today and should be repealed because semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist when the Bill of Rights was written, then turn around and say the First Amendment protects radio, television, movies, video games, the Internet, domain names, Facebook and Twitter. Carrying liberal logic on the Second Amendment through to the First Amendment, it would only cover the town crier, and hand-operated printing presses producing only books and newspapers, and nothing else.Even anything written with a No. 2 pencil or ballpoint pen would not be included. And those of you belonging to religions that formed after the 1790s? You’re screwed under liberal logic, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because, while liberals seek to expand government regulation and services — things that may not be bad or ill-intended on their own — they simultaneously try to curtail the Second Amendment. We don’t trust anti-gun people for this reason because history shows us that every genocide and democide is preceded by expansion of government power and gun control. We don’t trust anti-gunners because here in America, gun control is rooted in slavery and racism, with some of America’s modern anti-gun laws being direct copies of former Nazi laws that banned gun possession for Jews, blacks, gays and other “undesirables.”Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners tell us that the police and military are the only people who should have guns (which is a joke in itself), and that we need to give up our own guns and trust the government. We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know that hundreds of millions of people have been killed by their own governments in the last century, and not a single law seeking to ban the government from possessing guns has ever been submitted. Yet when but a few thousand people are killed by civilian criminals, tens of millions of American citizens like myself who did not commit any crimes at all are subjected to gun restrictions and personal persecution at the hands of emotional anti-gun bigots.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners insult us for our opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (aka the “ATF”). We don’t trust anti-gunners because we know the ATF is hardly a law enforcement agency but is really a glorified tax collection agency that has abused, ruined the lives of, or murdered dozens of innocent gun owners through overzealous enforcement of gun-related tax and paperwork regulations. Just ask Louis Katona, Patty and Paul Mueller, John Lawmaster, Tuscon Police Lt. Mike Lara or any of the dozens of other victims of criminal ATF agents. Where was the ACLU for all that? And it doesn’t help that President Obama tried to appoint known anti-gunner Andrew Traver to be the ATF director. Check out the ATF’s “Good Ol’ Boys Roundup,” “Project Gunrunner” scandal and their loss of department guns for a little F-Troop entertainment sometime, too.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they always bemoan the NRA, claiming the NRA is the source of all their anti-gun legislation problems. We don’t trust anti-gunners because it never occurs to them that perhaps it’s not the NRA per se that has the power, but the millions of members that belong to it, and the millions more Americans who otherwise support it and its mission. The NRA is probably the largest private organization in America; maybe that has something to do with its influence...? We also don’t trust anti-gunners because they’re too ignorant to understand that the NRA only represents a minority of us anyway.Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because while they were crying about the victims of 9/11 or Aurora or Sandy Hook, and thanking God they weren’t there, I and many other gun people like me were crying because we weren’t there, and asked God why we couldn’t have been. Many of us wish we were on one of the 9/11 airplanes, and not because we have a death wish but because we have a life wish. Because when we sit in silence and the world’s distractions fall away, the thought creeps in: Could I have made a difference?Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because I and many of us are what they call “sheepdogs” and we’re proud of that. Yet anti-gunners make fun of us, calling us “cowboys” and “wannabes” for it. Wanting to save lives and being willing to sacrifice one’s own to do it used to be considered a virtue in this country. Anti-gunners think they have the moral outrage, but the moral outrage is ours. I have never expressed any of these feelings openly to anyone because they are private and deeply personal. Screw you for demeaning us and motivating me to speak them.Do unto othersNo, anti-gunners, we don’t trust you. And you’ve given us no reason to, either. We gun owners obey the law each and every day, same as you. We defend your nation, protect your communities, teach your children, take care of you when you’re sick, defend you when you go to court or prosecute those who do you wrong. We cook and serve your food, haul and deliver your goods, construct your homes, unclog your sewers, make your electricity, and build or fix your cars.We are everywhere and all around you, and we exist with you peacefully. You are our friends, neighbors and countrymen, and we are these things proudly. We mourn with you when radicals crash airplanes into our buildings, when hurricanes destroy the lives of our people, or when the criminal and mentally ill kill dozens of our school children. We cheer with you when USA wins the gold medal, when terrorists like Bin Laden are brought to justice, or when we land a machine built by American hands on Mars.So what more can we do to earn your trust, your love and your acceptance other than surrender our rights, bow down to you and take your non-stop attacks?Anti-gunners label people like me “gun nuts” even though we&#39;re anything but nutty. Our enjoyment of firearms doesn’t define us; it is but a single value and right we enjoy and cherish, among many other rights and values we enjoy and cherish — including the very same ones anti-gunners do too — like the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights.No, anti-gunners are absolutely right: There can be no rational debate on this issue anymore. Anti-gunners don’t understand guns, they don’t understand crime, they don’t understand American history and traditions, they don’t understand gun owners and don’t care to understand us, and they reduce people like me to a debasing label or a number they’ve got no clue about.Anti-gunners reject our passions, our traditions, our knowledge, our experiences, our beliefs, our wisdom, our rights. Anti-gunners reject our very individuality by reducing us to labels, stereotypes and false or distorted statistics. Screw you for destroying that individuality and denying our humanity.I am proudly one of many: a caring, friendly, loyal and loving human being.I am an educated and intelligent person, and while I may not be the best-looking guy, friends tell me I have a great personality (yay?). Perhaps more importantly though, I am a proud citizen of this country, and I’d perform any sacrifice for others so that they may not themselves have to sacrifice.And unlike most anti-gunners, it seems, I have served my community and nation in various roles throughout the years — roles that, ironically, often entailed guns. Where I was once given a uniform and a gun, and trusted with it to ensure the safety and security of others, I am now a pariah among many of the very people I sacrificed for. I am sadly one of many here, too. What a terrible, hurtful insult and betrayal!An anti-gunner reads a book though, or sees a documentary on TV — or perhaps worst of all, gets a degree — and suddenly they have the almighty authority and expertise to tell us how we ought to live our lives, replying to our objections to their onslaught by throwing pictures of dead kids in our faces and commanding us to shut up, because we’re just a bunch of stupid radicals and liberals alone know what’s best for America.You anti-gunners out there will lead us down a path you do not want to go down. Your lack of care and understanding of those who abide by America’s oldest and deepest-rooted tradition will cause a social rift in this country of the likes we have never seen in America’s young history. Your lack of understanding chances causing a civil war — a civil war that will be far worse, more acrimonious, more prolonged and more deadly than the last one.Anti-gunners may think the military could prevent such a thing — an argument often used against us pro-gunners — but with only a few million people in the military, and with the United States containing 300 million citizens spread across nearly four million square miles, many of whom are themselves veterans, well, military occupation of this country is impossible. It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.Sleeping dragons and terrible resolveI do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. More about GunsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Dankbar: Guns control the Senate ARTICLE: Godfrey: Action must continueMore about WeaponsIMAGE: Opi.Snell.May3 ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Defend entire constitution, not just what you agree with ARTICLE: Letter to the editor: Our voice will be heard ARTICLE: Godfrey: It&#39;s an American attitude960Discuss PrintPosted in Opinion, Columnists, Snell on Friday, May 3, 2013 12:00 am. Updated: 11:01 am. | Tags: Guns, Weapons, Second Amendment, Firearms, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Shootings Similar StoriesClarke: The Pop Tart killer -- Or, boys will be boys Letter to the editor: Editorial fails to recognize culture of philanthropy on campus Godfrey: We are the Milennials Letter to the editor: Does Facebook Have a Place in the Workplace? Letter to the editor: Immigration reform should help those that deserve itMost ReadSnell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Snell: Waking the dragon — How Feinstein fiddled while America burned Search continues for missing halfway house resident Former ISU basketball player caught stealing Search continues for missing halfway house residentAD - Hyvee Healthy - Medium Rectangle Submit a letter Submit a letterExpress your opinion! Fill out this form to submit a Letter to the Editor.Submit letter Popular Commented Facebook Activity AD - HyVee Happier Healthier - HalfPage Connect with us: Iowa State Daily 108 Hamilton Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 515-294-4120admin@iowastatedaily.comSectionshome news business opinion sports games &amp; contests special sections classifieds advertising weather community calendarServicesabout us privacy terms of service contact us advertise place an ad home delivery apply submission forms site index add search toolbarSearchSearch in: All News Sports Business Opinion Unions Photo Galleries Video© Copyright 2013, Iowa State Daily, Ames, Iowa. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. &#91;Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]" target="_blank">It doesn’t help that most street cops (opposed to their politician bosses) are pro-gun, too. And what happens when the civilian industries that support the military stop producing the supplies our military needs?  The rift is already beginning. We must mend fences...Now.  Sleeping dragons and terrible resolve  I do not want to live through a war in my own backyard. I do not want our children to grow up in such an America, either. So anti-gunners: Please stop, I beg you. See the writing on the wall before it’s too late.    Yes, there is a terrible crime problem, and yes, that problem sometimes involves guns — but it is the perpetrator that is the problem, not the instrument. Yes, there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives on the issue of guns. And while I will be the very first person to criticize the Republican Party on its many and frequent mistakes, and even stand with my democratic friends in my disfavor of those things, on the gun issue it is not the conservatives who are mostly in the wrong this time.  We want the crime and killings to stop as much as you do, so to my fellow citizens who are anti-gun I say: So long as you deny our humanity, so long as you malign our dignity, intelligence and wisdom, so long as you seek to shade us under a cloud of evil that we do not partake in or support, so long as you tell us that because we own guns we are terrible people, you will prove yourselves absolutely right in that we won’t come to the table to talk with you.  And there will be no hope for resolution but through victory by force initiated by one side or the other, God help us, for we will not plow for those who didn’t beat their swords into plowshares.  Barry Snell is a senior in history and political science from Muscatine, Iowa. </a><br />
<br />
Sorry I dont know how to do links.</div>

 ]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://www.dukewayne.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11">Off Topic Discussions</category>
			<dc:creator>The Ringo Kid</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=6374</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
