Posted on 06/20/2016 4:05:22 PM PDT by TroutStalker
It’s like clockwork. Sick, twisted clockwork. A mass shooting happens. There is a flurry of confusing reports. A death toll is announced, a shooter identified. And then, even before the crime scene is cleaned up, come the pleas for gun control.
But you already know how this will play out. Gun-control advocates and their allies in the media will attack the gun-rights crowd as cold-hearted, stubborn, and out of touch. They will complain that no new legislation will result from the tragedy, and they will be right.
There are many reasons that this cycle repeats as it does. We live in a divided society where people cocoon with like-minded allies, and we’ve stopped listening to the other side. The NRA is powerful. We get distracted and move on to the next shiny thing. But one important point: The mainstream media lobbies hard for gun control, but it is very, very bad at gun journalism. It might be impossible ever to bridge the divide between the gun-control and gun-rights movements. But it’s impossible to start a dialogue when you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Media stories in the wake of mass shootings typically feature a laundry list of mistakes that reflect their writers’ inexperience with guns and gun culture. Some of them are small but telling: conflating automatic and semi-automatic weapons, assault rifle and assault weapon, caliber and gauge—all demonstrating a general lack of familiarity with firearms. Some of them are bigger. Like calling for “common-sense gun control” and “universal background checks” after instances in which a shooter purchased a gun legally and passed background checks. Or focusing on mass shootings involving assault weapons—and thereby ignoring statistics that show that far more people die from handguns.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Freedom of the press should be restricted to hand set type on manually cranked presses, because the founders couldn't have forseen high speed presses or the internet.
The gun control freaks are like ghouls.
Not before the bodies are even buried do they try to push thier sick agenda of disarming American citizens for the actions of muslim terrorists...
Cannons were around at the time of the founding of this nation.....pretty powerful weapons. Yet the Founding Fathers did not ban them.
So this articles argument is a fail from the word go.
The new, semi-literate fascists in journalism are like zombies. They need “brains...brains!”
They should be on low incomes in isolated areas near deadly predators of various kinds. That would change their perspective.
Come to realize it, that wouldn’t stop them. They’re the more equal animals. They would still want their less stylish, more technically inclined neighbors to be disarmed.
“...and thereby ignoring statistics that show that far more people die from handguns.”
Grammar alert...
Which show that...
Good point
I was going to say that letters of marque and reprisal were issued to persons owning fully armed sailing ships. That is, people with the best of the best for the time period.
Yup. The Founders had *no* problem with people running around with the battleship-equivalent of the day - the kind of thing that could and did lay waste to coastal towns that annoyed their owners sufficiently.
It’s like calling for curtailment of freedom of speech every time a defamation suit is filed. It’s getting tired and weaker every time they do it.
This attack lasted THREE! SOLID! HOURS! And claimed about 50 victims.
A blunderbuss would have sufficed.
equivalent in the context
Bttt.
This is actually a pretty good article.
Cannons were around,
We’re Not Mentioned!
It was a pretty good article.
Beat them enough times, hard enough, and they learn some reality.
One difficulty is that this has become a form of class warfare at this point - "gun people" are characterized as ignorant, malevolent, and jealous of their prerogatives. The last, the only true point, is presented as a bad thing by people equally jealous of theirs on other issues.
Yes, firearms owners are suspicious, and we have very good reason to be. One would never place the keeping of legislation regarding automobiles in the hands of people who hate them and wish to make it so that no one owns one. That sort of legislation mirrors the stuff we're seeing from the gun prohibitionist side: proudly ignorant, thoroughly useless, totally malicious, and eventually counterproductive. It is legislation that will be overwhelmingly ignored by its targets, for targets we are, and we have no intention whatever of becoming defenseless targets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.