T
H
E

L
I
B
E
R
T
A
R
I
A
N

E
N
T
E
R
P
R
I
S
E


I
s
s
u
e

45


L. Neil Smith's
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 45, May 1, 1999

Vin,

Just a note to let you know that talk-radio host Al Rantel on KABC Los Angeles (http://www.kabc.com/frames.html?page=/personalities/index.html) read excerpts from your 4/21 column on the air. He read them 4/27 at 12:37PM PDT.

Al Rantel said he does not normally read material on his show, but that your column was so good he had to make an exception. He interupted himself during the reading to exclaim at how great the text was. He used your material during his argument about the futility of the laundry list of anti-self defense laws recently wheeled out by the president.

The parts he read were, as I recall, the first four paragraphs of the "reply" portion of your column, starting with "In Israel...", skipped the fifth short paragraph, read the sixth ("Unlike you...") omitting the word "Garand."

He also read these portions of the remainder:

"... I would still use my weapons to defend your rights, your property, and the safety of your family, even after you have condemned me, vilified me, and voted to strip me of my God-given right to self-defense."

"Do I take it you oppose the existence or use of all firearms?"

"And what about today in Littleton, Colorado? Would you have condemned the police to enter that building without firearms? Or do you actually believe that firearms are fine, so long as they're only in the possession of government agents ... as was the case under Stalin in 1931, under Hitler in 1942, under Mao in 1955, under Pol Pot in 1971?"

"Continue on your present course. You seem to be in the majority. So, with luck, you may yet survive -- at least briefly -- to live under just such a regime, yourself."

He identified you by name and position at the LVRJ.

Unfortunately, this talk show host is a nerf libertarian. He makes a few of the right noises, but said on his show that he had no real objection to most of the victim disarmamanent proposals. His point was that those proposed laws would be ineffective and would not have altered the events at Columbine High School.

I hope you're having a good time on your book tour!

Pete

---

Hi, Pete --

Thanks for writing. That column has been getting a lot of circulation -- demonstrating that, perhaps, there is indeed some point to stating our principles forthrightly, rather than cringing in the corner, advancing one limp compromise measure after another, and waiting to "see how they fly."

-- V.S.

Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com


Back to the Letters Page