Idiots Who Read (and Write to) the New York Times

Given my first attempt to get a letter to the editor published in the NYT failed miserably, I thought I would turn my attention to letters that the Paper of Record considers worthy of being printed. The following letter was printed in response a Times editorial about the recent DC Circuit decision overturning the ban on handguns in the District.

To the Editor:

Residing in the District of Columbia area requires distinct differences in the way we lead our lives: When we enter a federal building, we are asked to step through a metal detector. When driving, we may be asked to take a detour. Even when walking down the street, we may be forced to pause as a diplomat’s motorcade passes an intersection.

Those of us who are required to follow these rules gladly do so each day. The argument that the Second Amendment protects the right of District citizens to keep handguns in their homes ignores other realities and usurps common sense.

I truly hope that the founding fathers did not intend to invite an inherent danger to the capital of their nation.

Matthew Taverna
Arlington, Va., March 14, 2007

Yikes. So many problems in so few words. The main point seems to be that the District is a special place with special rules, so if we have to make allowances in some areas of city life, it is perfectly reasonable to expect people to bow to Congress infringing their Second Amendment rights. Except that these "distinct differences" are present IN EVERY SINGLE CITY!

"When we enter a federal building, we are asked to step through a metal detector."

News flash: there's metal detectors in a lot office buildings these days. Also, there are federal buildings in places other than the District.

"When driving, we may be asked to take a detour."

First, driving in the District is a bad idea in the first place. Second, have you ever driven on any road in any city? There's always detours you have to take for a variety of reasons.

"Even when walking down the street, we may be forced to pause as a diplomat’s motorcade passes an intersection."

There's probably more motorcades in the District than other cities, but you would also be forced to pause as a fire truck or ambulance pass an intersection in any city.

"Those of us who are required to follow these rules gladly do so each day."

Like you have a choice? If you don't follow them, you will either not be able to enter a building or die. I guess avoiding these consequences makes one glad to follow the rule.

"The argument that the Second Amendment protects the right of District citizens to keep handguns in their homes ignores other realities and usurps common sense."

I love it when people make a farcical argument to support something, and then put down the other side by making vague references to a lack of common sense. Hey idiot: your examples have nothing to do with the right to own a handgun! It's the slippery slope fallacy and a pretty poor example of it that. Under your logic, we shouldn't be allowed to own handguns in any city. I guess these "distinct differences" also explain why District residents don't (and shouldn't) have any representation in Congress. Hey, you can't vote because the District is a special place with metal detectors and road detours! It usurps common sense!

"I truly hope that the founding fathers did not intend to invite an inherent danger to the capital of their nation."

I don't think the founding fathers even intended the District to actually be a real city with full-time residents. If we wanted to prevent this "inherent danger" (which exists everywhere else in the country where people own guns), Congress could simply pass a law banning personal handguns within 100 feet of the area surrounding the National Mall. That way members of Congress could feel even safer (even though they already have security, something 75% can't afford and probably needs) and people could protect themselves in their homes.

"Matthew Taverna
Arlington, Va., March 14, 2007"

What? You don't even live in the District (although neither do I)! You're just an asshole across the river who thinks that guns are bad and that your neighbors shouldn't be allowed to have one while you can (you can even carry a handgun in public! Two if you want). Although you will probably never read this, I would just like to say that you, Matthew Taverna, are an idiot with an extreme lack of reasoning skills. I hope your published stupidity one day catches up with you , like when you're over for dinner at a friend's house in the District and an armed robber breaks in and kills you both because your friend couldn't own a handgun.

In conclusion, this letter was completely retarded and my letter criticizing Murray Chass was much more worthy of being published in this respectable newspaper. Good day.