Making sense of the NRA's 'loaded questions'

Published: Sunday, June 24, 2012 at 6:30 a.m. Last Modified: Friday, June 22, 2012 at 6:52 p.m.

On June 18, the Star-Banner published an editorial, "Dishing out loaded questions," that left a lot to be desired.

As in the past, the primary purpose of the editorial appeared to be to bash the National Rifle Association. Like many liberal newspapers, the Star-Banner refers to the NRA as if it were a monster in the forest, always plotting some evil deed against the population.

The fact is, the NRA is an organization made up of people just like you and me people who put great value on our constitutional rights, specifically on the Second Amendment. The NRA has millions of members. They come from all walks of life hard-working, mostly middle-class folks who might be your neighbors. They are law-abiding people who tend to be self-sufficient and believe in individual responsibility.

That's the real "gun lobby," as the paper calls it, not the intimidating bully described in the editorial.

What the Star-Banner has never seemed to realize in the 20 years I've lived in Marion County is that, because we live so close to so many outdoor recreational venues our many lakes, rivers and the Ocala National Forest this town has more than its share of hunters, fishermen, campers and outdoorsmen. A large percentage own firearms, which they use for hunting, target shooting and, yes, self-protection.

The June 18 editorial calls a recent questionnaire sent out by the NRA to candidates for sheriff "a web of intimidation." For example, one question asks: "Do you agree that no victim of a crime should be required to surrender his life, health, safety, personal dignity, autonomy or property to a criminal, nor should a victim be required to retreat in the face of an attack from any place he or she has a right to be?" The answers are: a) "Yes, I believe the Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground' is appropriate, and victims have a right to fight back without a duty to retreat"; or b) "No, I oppose the Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground' and believe victims should surrender to criminals or retreat to avoid fighting back." The paper says: "Fight back" or "surrender to criminals" the NRA doesn't allow for a middle ground.

I say, what middle ground?

You either fight or you surrender/retreat. By the way, in many cases, turning your back on an aggressor and retreating will get you killed.

The Star-Banner has an equally jaundiced view on the rest of the questions in the document sent to the candidates. But don't we as voters have a right to know where our law-enforcement personnel, especially the sheriff himself, stand on the issue of self-defense?

Originally posted here:
Making sense of the NRA's 'loaded questions'