June 29, 2020 10:09:03 AM
Points out how letter skewed points
It is hard to see one's writing completely distorted. It is frustrating to have words put in one's mouth that not only were never said, but were not intended. I did not write, as Mr. Lollar declares, that all the racial problem (sic) started from the Harrison drug law. Obviously, the racial problems were with us since before the country even started. I did write that the law was designed to provide yet another tool to subjugate our African-American population. I also wrote that the law had the further effect of providing the Federal government with a tool to control us all, in a way in conflict with our Bill of Rights (the Supreme Court notwithstanding).
I cannot imagine how Mr. Lollar inferred that I wrote that the law made the addicts. Poverty, misery, and hopelessness made the addicts. The law merely gave the states a way to lock them up for it. This was at a time when peonage was still prevalent in the Gulf states. For any unfamiliar with the term, the Thirteenth Amendment allowed anyone convicted of a crime to be rented out as a laborer, usually to railroads, planters, or anyone else in need of cheap labor. More convicts, more laborers. Laws were passed allowing the seizure of the children of a convicted man, and making them bonded labor. They were "apprenticed," never in a trade, 'till their majority. They could be beaten, and were recaptured if they ran away. More convictions, more "apprentices." Guess which citizens suffered these fates?
I never wrote that I want anybody to "turn their guns in." I suggested a ban on certain kinds of firearms. Ban their sales and offer a buy-back program for the ones already in private hands. I did not suggest that the buy-back be mandatory, just very attractive. I never referred to anybody as a redneck. I did write what I thought were reasons for owning various kinds of firearms.
Finally, I take issue with the conceit that anything I write, or that any opponent of the oppression of anybody by category, wants "anarchy, lawlessness and the overthrow of the government." Or that it is divisive. From his letter, I must assume that he thinks that writing in support of our African-American population, with the goal of bring them together with the rest of us on an equal basis, is speaking "hate and discord." Whose hate? Certainly not mine. Where is the discord in bringing people together?
Well, maybe not finally. Mr. Lollar has seen fit to describe me as "educated beyond my intelligence." I have, in fact, done everything I can to make that true, and may have succeeded, but Mr. Lollar does not mean it as a compliment. When reason and logic fail, use ad hominem as an argument.
1. Our View: NAACP's letter takes wrong approach DISPATCH EDITORIALS
3. Voice of the people: On paying to move the statue LETTERS TO THE EDITOR ([email protected])
4. Armstrong Williams: Who can the American people trust? NATIONAL COLUMNS
5. Other Editors: Election change might not be enough NATIONAL COLUMNS