The Trellisnby Charles Edward EatonnSo there I was lying in my breechclothnWhile the scented trade winds blew over me,nStripped clean of angst by a swim in the sea,nMy skin air-brushed with the gold of the sun -nSomewhere, far off, the image abattoirnAs I stretched out dreaming with open hands,nNo hammer, no cleaver, no dripping club.nBlood in the eyes transferred to hibiscus —nOne learns these extrapolations early.nThe use of the salve and the saving grace.nThe flinging oneself down at the day’s end.nCalling amorini from the smogged air,nA woman’s perfume floating a garden —nDone before, so we can do it again.nIt is as though you harbor an ideal mannWho always waits like a non-paying guest.nGive him a bed by the sea to flourish,nA sunset suit in the rich evening light.nStill one is struck with the fact that he isnPut down — a glancing blow of the hammer?-nThe optic nerves in the thread of a flower.nIn the soft hand, the ghost of a handle? —nHe wants to pay his keep with your content.nOffering his chest to your late mistress.nSuggesting balneologies of blue.nHow the demulcent trade winds treat the lips.nThe aequo animo of his undress.nHe is a trellis of the treasured life.nBut one cannot quite get over the factnThat he is fallen, that some blow did tell.nHis heart ravished with its own red roses.nThe lattice of last resort, espaliered nerves.nOne rests and rests — at last, supine success.nWhether it was wind, will, or wayward love.nYou were pushed over in a pose — I comenAlong the beach, stuffed with this fantasy:nNo wonder it fell, no wonder it fell! —nUnless we finger forays one at a time.nFeeling the nerve faint in the golden man.nThe cravings that cram from the crosspieces.nEven the lying down is too lonesome —nWho can say the tyrant of the trellisnDoes not plan, pitch, a tower in the sand?n24/CHRONICLESnnnGiven such indisputable technical realities, why do thenanti-gun activists have such a zealous hatred for paramilitary-stylensemiautomatic rifles? It is a matter of popularnpsychology. Such weapons have a lean, functional look ofnlethal efficiency that gives them a sinister aspect. Such annappearance plays right into the hands of the hoplophobes.n”The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’snconfusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semiautomaticnassault weapons — anything that looks like a machinengun is assumed to be a machine gun — can onlynincrease the chance of public support for restrictions onnthese weapons,” boasts a recent publication by the EducationalnFund to End Handgun Violence.nThe anti-gunners and their media allies have no desire tonconfuse the public with facts. The anti-gun, anti-SecondnAmendment message is pervasive in both mass-medianentertainment and journalism. During the week of Marchn13-17, 1989, the CBS television network provided repeatedngrist for the gun-banners’ mill. The popular Monday nightnsituation comedy Designing Women featured a distortion ofnfact that could only have stemmed from either blatantnignorance or a willful intent to deceive on the part ofnwriter-producer Linda Bloodworth Thompson. In this episodenone of the ditzy female characters on the show legallynpurchased a Colt AR-15 rifle following a series of threatsnagainst her and her pet pig. When her friends from worknmade a surprise midnight call upon her, the nervous Atlantanbelle opened up with what was obviously a barrage ofnfully-automatic fire. Actress Dixie Carter then self-righteouslyndelivered a homily on the evils of such weapons andnthe malign “gun lobby.”nCBS followed this with its evening newscast of March 15.nCommentator Dan Rather announced the news of thengovernment ban on importation of “AK-47 type weapons”nand then held forth in a prerecorded segment in which henappeared at a police gun range somewhere in New Jersey toninterview two alleged experts on the evils of such weapons.nThe demonstrated expertise of the first “expert” whomnRather interviewed was less than impressive. The governmentnagent proceeded to display an Uzi whose barrel lengthnwas plainly below the legally mandated minimum for thensemiautomatic versions of the weapon imported into thisncountry from Israel. The’ audience, of course, was led tonbelieve that they were seeing a weapon that was already inncommon circulation among the citizenry. He then referrednto it as a “rifle,” and identified its detachable magazine as an”clip.” These were mistakes in technical nomenclature thatnno truly knowledgeable person would have made. Anothernlaw enforcement oflicer featured in the broadcast referred tonthose who might wish to use semiautomatic weapons fornhunting purposes as “weird.” So much for the ethical andnobjective standards of broadcast journalism.nThe Rather broadcast touched upon another distortednissue that constanfly surfaces in the debate over semiautomaticnarms. Opponents claim that no genuine sportsmannwould seek to blast Bambi with a thirty-round barrage from anweapon like the AK-47. This ignores the fact that suchnweapons are legal for hunting purposes in 48 of the 50nstates, although in many instances semiautomatics mustnhave their magazines blocked so that they will accept nonmore than five rounds of ammunition, which is the samen