• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Letters to the Editor - Draft

Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
14,291
Likes
2,135
Location
New Hampshire
Feedback: 23 / 0 / 0
Hi fellow NESers, I plan on submitting this to the Union Leader and other NH area newspapers today or tomorrow. Keep in mind the audience.

Please send feedback! Thanks!

The Democratic nominee for President, Hillary Clinton, has outrageously claimed she supports the Second Amendment of the Constitution. The Second Amendment affirms a preexisting right of Americans to keep and bear arms. Consistent with her political strategy of obfuscation by having both a “public and private position” on matters, Clinton has attempted to pull the wool over the eyes of gun-owning voters. She has humorously claimed her gun control proposals will actually help protect gun rights.

A cursory review of her “private” position lays bare her true intentions: She has vowed to ban commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms. She hopes to expand a flawed background check system that would prohibit Americans from bequeathing heirlooms without the approval of a bureaucrat. She wants to put Americans on secret government watch lists – without due process – to prohibit them from lawfully purchasing firearms. Clinton promises to accomplish all of this via executive fiat.

She’s shown contempt for the landmark Heller and McDonald court decisions dismissing them as being “wrongly decided” when it came to affirming an individual right to keep and bear arms. She has promised to reverse these decisions by loading the court with anti-gun jurists.

Finally, and perhaps most tellingly, was Clinton’s response to a question from a town hall meeting in Keene, concerning the Australian government’s firearm confiscation program. Clinton seemingly endorsed the idea of applying the model here noting it’s “worth looking at”.

Don’t be fooled.

If you are a responsible, self-respecting gun-owning American, don’t vote for Hillary Clinton.

Final version here: https://www.northeastshooters.com/v...Editor-Draft?p=5259291&viewfull=1#post5259291

Union Leader link: http://www.unionleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20161101/OPINION04/161109985
 
Last edited:
Well done. I'd suggest a few minor editorial changes (I'm an editor, I can't help it). The commonly used phrase is amendment to the Constitution, (not of). The "She" following the colon (and nice job using a colon correctly--it's rare) should not be capitalized. There should be no hyphen in "commonly-owned" (not used in -ly compound adjectives). "Semi-automatic" is more commonly spelled without the hyphen, but it is not incorrect. There's no need for a comma after "Keene." Finally, the period after "worth looking at" should be inside the closed quote.

Picky shit, but it provides my family a living. Again well done.
 
Thanks for the encouragment.

Obie1, thanks for the feedback. This is EXACTLY what I was looking for. Needed somebody with your exact skill set to review and reply with comments.
 
Well done. I'd suggest a few minor editorial changes (I'm an editor, I can't help it). The commonly used phrase is amendment to the Constitution, (not of). The "She" following the colon (and nice job using a colon correctly--it's rare) should not be capitalized. There should be no hyphen in "commonly-owned" (not used in -ly compound adjectives). "Semi-automatic" is more commonly spelled without the hyphen, but it is not incorrect. There's no need for a comma after "Keene." Finally, the period after "worth looking at" should be inside the closed quote.

Picky shit, but it provides my family a living. Again well done.

This may as well be written in Greek. I have no English skillz whatsoever
 
Very nice letter.

Minor suggested change - I would add Supreme Court after the reference to Heller/McDonald because not every reader will know what court made those decisions ("She’s shown contempt for the landmark Heller and McDonald Supreme Court decisions...") .
 
Sent to Union Leader, Seacoast Online, Concord Monitor and Carriage Town News.

Final version:

The Democratic nominee for President, Hillary Clinton, has outrageously claimed she supports the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Second Amendment affirms a preexisting right of Americans to keep and bear arms. Consistent with her political tactic of obfuscation by having both a “public and private position” on matters, Clinton has attempted to pull the wool over the eyes of gun-owning voters. She has humorously suggested her gun control proposals will actually help protect gun rights.

A cursory review of her other “public” position lays bare her intentions: she has vowed to ban commonly owned semiautomatic firearms. She hopes to expand a flawed background check system that would prohibit Americans from bequeathing heirlooms without the approval of a government bureaucrat. She wants to put Americans on secret government watch lists – without due process – to prohibit them from lawfully purchasing firearms. Clinton promises to accomplish all of this via executive fiat.

She’s shown contempt for the landmark Heller and McDonald court decisions dismissing them as being “wrongly decided” when it came to affirming an individual right to keep and bear arms. She has promised to reverse these decisions by loading the court with anti-gun jurists.

Finally, and perhaps most tellingly: Clinton’s response to a question from a town hall meeting in Keene concerning the Australian government’s firearm confiscation program. Clinton seemingly endorsed the idea of applying the model here noting it’s “worth looking at.”

Don’t be fooled.

If you are a responsible, self-respecting gun-owning American, don’t vote for Hillary Clinton.

- - - Updated - - -

Very nice letter.

Minor suggested change - I would add Supreme Court after the reference to Heller/McDonald because not every reader will know what court made those decisions ("She’s shown contempt for the landmark Heller and McDonald Supreme Court decisions...") .

Good point. I had that in my original but I had to leave a lot on the "cutting room floor" in order to keep it to under 250 words. "Supreme Court" didn't make the cut.
 
Last edited:
constructive criticism , obfuscation is going to fly over folks heads, confuse might be better, keep it simple. We just need to get the swing vote here.
 
Sent to Union Leader, Seacoast Online, Concord Monitor and Carriage Town News.

Final version:



- - - Updated - - -



Good point. I had that in my original but I had to leave a lot on the "cutting room floor" in order to keep it to under 250 letters. "Supreme Court" didn't make the cut.

FIFY - "...in order to keep it to under 250 words." [laugh]
 
The letter is very good, it is too long to get published. It has to be half the length to make a "letter to the editor". You have written a good guest editorial, but again the goal it to get it read by people from the other side.
 
The letter is very good, it is too long to get published. It has to be half the length to make a "letter to the editor". You have written a good guest editorial, but again the goal it to get it read by people from the other side.

I hope not. I've had Letters-To-Editor and guest OP-EDs published before. So long as you stick to the guidelines, e.g. size, full name/address, etc. then all should be fine.

Actually, my goal isn't to connect to people on the "other side". I think they're too far gone. I'm trying to connect with other gun owners who are may not share the same level of concern of a Clinton presidency.

Well said now if only gun owners will take heed.

I can't tell you how many gun-owning friends of mine are actually voting for her. Not as in voting for Johnson or Stein. But her. I have no idea how they can justify it. Actually, sadly, I do.
 
Sent to Union Leader, Seacoast Online, Concord Monitor and Carriage Town News.

Final version:



- - - Updated - - -



Good point. I had that in my original but I had to leave a lot on the "cutting room floor" in order to keep it to under 250 words. "Supreme Court" didn't make the cut.

It should be interesting if A, the Concord Monitor, aka The Hack Rag prints it and B, if they do, how bad their "editors" will butcher it.

Well done, by the way.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom