Skip to main content

A felon thanks the NRA

I've been awaiting confirmation to find out if the letter-to-the-editor sent to the Hartford Courant by one Gary W. Bornman - a felon serving time in Florence, Colorado - was legitimate. After waiting a few days and researching here and there, it appears that the letter was in fact written by Mr. Bornman. This man actually has a history of doing this kind of thing. In 2001, the Hartford Courant noted that one of Bornman's hobbies was writing provocative letters-to-the-editor. It then noted a 1999 letter that the felon sent to the Los Angeles Times, entitled, "Counsel Me Before I Leave Prison."

In this letter, Bornman wrote: "Prison officials aren't the least bit concerned that I have constant thoughts of harming others or that I fantasize about such things as assassinating the president or killing a bunch of [prison officials] as they leave work."

A week ago, the Hartford Courant posted the following letter-to-the-editor, written by Bornman, and titled, "Felon Thanks the NRA":

"As a lifelong career criminal, although I no longer enjoy the right to keep and bear arms, I'd like to take a moment to express my appreciation to the National Rifle Association for nonetheless protecting my ability to easily obtain them through its opposition to universal background checks.

Upon release in a few years from my current federal sentence on bank robbery and weapons charges, I fully anticipate being able to stop at a gun show on my way home to Connecticut -- where new laws have made it nearly impossible for a felon to readily purchase guns or ammunition -- in order to buy some with which to resume my criminal activities.

And so, a heartfelt thank you to the NRA and all those members of Congress voting with them. I, along with tens of thousands of other criminals, couldn't do what we do without you.

Gary W. Bornman
The writer is an inmate at the federal "Supermax" prison in Florence, Colo."

Whether Mr. Bornman was being entirely serious or a bit sarcastic, and whether he was being genuine in his sentiments or just trying to stir trouble, I couldn't be certain. In any case, though, the letter does make a strong point - one the NRA and its proponents will try to ignore and deny more vehemently than ESPN ignores and denies that Tim Tebow throws a football more poorly than a 2-year old blind kid named Lucky.

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/letters/hcrs-15241hc--20130605,0,4878261.story

http://articles.courant.com/2001-06-13/news/0106130065_1_fbi-agents-bank-robber-suicide-attempt

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/06/10/2130331/felon-in-maximum-security-prison-thanks-the-nra-for-making-it-easy-for-him-to-get-a-gun/

http://www.nationalmemo.com/you-have-to-read-this-letter-from-a-lifelong-criminal-thanking-the-nra-for-making-it-easy-for-him-to-get-guns/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/06/13/gary_w_bornman_felon_pens_a_heartfelt_thank_you_to_the_nra_for_opposing.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"