Journalists

I haven’t commented on any anti-gun screeds in the news lately.  I just haven’t had the energy.  It seems like all I’m doing is repeating myself over and over and over again.  It gets a bit old after 5 years or so.

I know I’m not saying anything my readers don’t already know anyway so I just haven’t bothered.

However, this one really caught my attention after it popped in my Google news alerts this morning.  There’s some pretty good discussion going on in comments, but some thoughts about the article itself:

A powerful Tec-9 assault pistol is among firearms used as evidence, then handed over to the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office. Above, patrolman John Myers looks for the serial number. [photo caption at top of article; bold added -ed]

…a state representative from Biddeford [Maine] …sponsored legislation that is providing Maine State Police troopers with more firepower in the form of AR-15 assault rifles, replacing their 9mm Ruger rifles.

“It’s like we’re sending them out and saying ‘go get killed,’ in a sense, with the 9 millimeter,” Beaudoin said Wednesday. [from the second and third paragraphs of the story itself -ed]

So, basically what they’re telling us is that the 9mm is a powerful, deadly caliber when fired from a Tec 9 with a 5″ barrel, but sending cops out with rifles with 16″ barrels chambered in the same caliber is “saying ‘go get killed'”.

Holy contradiction Batman.

Similar scenes have been repeated since Los Angeles police met armor-piercing fire in 1997 from two bank robbers armed with military-style assault weapons.

Um…NO.

The bank robbers in North Hollywood were not using so-called “assault weapons”, they were using machine guns.

This could just be a simple case of journalist ignorance…all too typical in people who are educated in the art of journalism, but not in the subject matters about which they’re writing.  Alternatively, this could be a case of knowingly attempting to further the propaganda equating “assault weapon” with machine gun.  Either way, whether intentional or through ignorance, the fact remains that the result is a lie.   So-called “assault weapons” are NOT the same thing as machine guns.  Bans on “assault weapons” have no bearing on machine guns in any way.

According to FBI statistics, of the 530 law enforcement officers who were killed nationwide from 1999 to 2008, 131 of them, about 25 percent, were shot with rifles or shotguns.

Hmm.  I thought we were talking about “assault weapons” here?  I understand that the FBI reports don’t differentiate between “assault weapons” and…um…what would you call them?…um…”friendly weapons”?…”passive weapons”?…”defense weapons”?…NON-“assault weapons” I guess…anyway, the FBI reports don’t identify them that way, understandably so, considering how subjective and amorphous the term actually is.  So, I can understand using the category of “rifles” even though that would include hunting and sporting arms as well as “assault weapons”; but shotguns? 

It’s almost like they were just trying to pad their numbers or something.  Naaah, couldn’t be that.

Journalists would never intentionally try to be misleading in an effort to push an agenda.

In Maine, Beaudoin recalled one member of a legislative committee who opposed her successful push to ramp up the arms race with criminals and supply troopers with assault rifles.

“Funny, it was a man who used to be in the police force, and that blew me away,” she said.

Hmm.  It’s almost like the rank and file cops don’t buy into the hokum being sold by the George Soros/Joyce foundation backed “Interantional Association of Chief’s of Police” or something.

And, as usual, the most telling thing about this to me is that the supporters of gun control must lie, mislead and misdirect in order to rationalize their position. 

If the plain, unvarnished truth isn’t enough to support your agenda, maybe the agenda isn’t worth supporting.

Just a thought.

4 thoughts on “Journalists

  1. Actually, they were using AK-47 or AKM, which is NOT a machine gun. They are… Wait for it… Assault Rifles. Full auto does not a machine gun make.

  2. I get your point but I beg to differ.

    Title 26, US Code, Chapter 53 ยง5845(b):

    The term "machinegun" means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically, more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single pull of the trigger.

    For the purposes I was using the term (in a legal sense, versus a military sense), the term "machinegun" is entirely appropriate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.