More on Guns

William B. White WHITEWB at JCCW22.CC.SUNYJCC.EDU
Tue Sep 23 14:18:19 MDT 1997


From:   NAME: Bill White
        FUNC: HUMANITIES
        TEL: 326/371                          <WHITE, BILL AT A1 AT JCCV03>
To:     IN%"rushtalk at athena.csdco.com"@MRGATE at JCCW22


Stephen,  some of your responses on this thread have left me mystified, so I'm
going to try to sort through some of them.

You wrote:  (snip)  >Again - you fail to address the one point I
>have made continuously: you brought up Mr. Heston - not me.  John brought
>up Meryl Streep, not me.  You have managed to twist my original post into
>an attack on a man I never even mentioned, and then you tell me - excuse
>me, then you tell someone else - that said attack is absurd.  Make up
>claims - draw conclusions.

        Actually, you have metioned Heston several times in this thread, albeit
most frequently to say you haven't  mentioned Heston.  But you have certainly
been responding to posts on Heston's speech:  Go back to Dennis's post:  MORE
ON GUNS.  Dennis posted text from Heston's speech on the 2nd ammendment.  You
responded by saying:  (snip)
9/17
>Did the author happen to rank each of the ten in their order of importance
>- or simply put the one in which he expresses the most interest at the top?

>Almost seems self serving for anyone to say that the amendment in which
>they express the most interest is the most important.  Seems sort of slanted.

        Your response seems clearly to refer to Heston (who else could it have
been?)  This establishes you as a critic of Heston's argument.  Later I pointed
out to you that Heston IS a spokesman for the NRA.  He is an officer with a
particular mission to communicate concerns of the NRA.   It is likely that
most, if not all, members, including leaders agree with Heston.  You are
quibbling when you insist you have not been mentioning Heston and that it is
something I am intruding into the thread.   Your use of pronouns reveals
otherwise.

        On 9/18 you wrote:
>Almost seems self serving for anyone

        Anyone like Heston, for example?

> to say that the amendment in which
>they express the most interest is the most important.  Seems sort of slanted.

        Then in a later post you say:
>First - pretty fascinating - when movie stars support liberal positions -
>we call them unqualified.  When Heston does it I should bow?

        Here you try to compare liberal celebrities with Heston, leaving us to
guess who you have in mind.  Dennis has already pointed out to you that  unlike
some liberal celebrities who take stands (e.g. Meryl Steep on Alar) Heston
bases his position on argument and interpretation of a document most Americans
should be somewhat familiar with.

        And through the thread you continue to insist:

>First of all - I never mentioned one word about Mr. Heston's position on
>anything. . .  (snip) .  . .
9/19 (snip)
>I never mentioned him in the first place?
(snip)
>I NEVER brought up Mr. Heston

        You are running with the hares and chasing with the hounds.
9/22
>But if I read Mr. White (I believe) correctly, he was indeed
>attributing some certain expertise to Mr. Heston.

        Is this what you mean by "some certain expertise"?
        I said:  Heston has a lot of experience with guns, war, and what's
at stake to preserve freedom.  This list summarizes the "ethos" portion of
Heston's argument on the 2nd ammendment.  A speaker tells his audience how his
background is relevant to the issue; he establishes his connection with the
issue and establishes his credibility.  This is standard procedure for
effective rhetoric.   Heston tells us has used guns, fought in WWII, and
marched for rights with Martin Luther King.  This doesn't establish
"expertise," but  it does show his history of  his exercise of his rights his
commitment  to freedom, and his credibility with his audience.  I would say he
has ethos.   His expertise is a related but different issue.  However, as John
has asked, what expertise is required to comment on the Bill of Rights?

        And if someone speaking for the NRA (like Heston) or even an ordinary
citizen asserts that the 2nd ammendment is basic to the others because it
allows citizens to own arms to defend and ensure their rights, what is your
contention?

Sincerely,

Bill White



More information about the Rushtalk mailing list