In contrast, I've received a number of letters calling for my head because of a column I wrote about guns that unfortunately ended up running on the same day of our coverage of the Mililani triple-murder-suicide.
I'm not sure what to make of any of the letters. I'm not sure the anti-gun writers actually read my column and I'm pretty sure Clinton didn't actually read my book, which included a column entitled "Presidents Should Be Seen and Not Hugged."
That column referred to one of the president's trips to Hawaii during which he seemed hell-bent on shaking every hand on the island. A grandmother accused me of being disrespectful of the president. Then she mentioned that she had waited hours to see Clinton and had shouted "Hey, Bill! How 'bout a hug?" when he walked past her. I merely suggested that shouting at the President of the United States as if he were Barney the Purple Dinosaur was more disrespectful than anything I had said.
Anyway, I signed one of my books for the president and gave it to former Gov. John Waihee, who I appeared with on a radio show. John sometimes golfs with Bill in Washington, D.C., and he apparently passed it on. The president wrote a nice little note of thanks to me.
And I appreciate it, even though Clinton couldn't possibly know that he and Hillary have been the subject of some good-nature ribbing in this space from time to time. OK, maybe some of it hasn't been completely good-natured, but that's history. It's not that I'm a shallow guy, but now that the president and I are buddies, I'm a complete Clinton supporter. I think the whole Whitewater thing is just a Republican setup and that Jack Kemp was a lousy quarterback.
If Bill is big enough to put our past differences behind us and send me a nice, personal letter, by God, I'm big enough to jump on his election bandwagon. In fact, I want him to know that I'm available to write a few speeches. I'd like to take a crack at explaining this whole Paula Jones fiasco to the country. So, Bill, give me a call. I'm your Donkey Boy.
Now, as to the angry anti-gun letters, all I can say is that I'm extremely sorry that the column ran the day after the tragic shooting. As much as people like to believe in conspiracies, it was just coincidence that the column ran on that day. It was written two days before the shooting.
But the point of the column had nothing to do with the circumstances of the Mililani shooting, in which an enraged man murdered his neighbors. No form of gun control short of an outright ban and confiscation of all weapons could have prevented such an incident.
The point of my column was NOT that everyone should be allowed to carry guns. My point was that it was silly to suggest that a recent study was wrong when it found that if more people carried concealed weapons, the number of murders, rapes and assaults would go down.
I'm not saying people should carry concealed guns. I'm just saying that it is human nature for criminals to prey on the weak and unprotected. If a criminal thought a certain person was armed and capable of protecting himself, I think he would try to find someone else to rob.
It was a purely academic argument.
Unfortunately, gun possession is a subject that many people are passionate about. And they are most passionate following a wretched event like the Mililani shooting. It definitely was not a good time to begin a gun debate.
While I believe what I said in the column is true, I'm sorry it ended up running at such an unfortunate time.
