You Know Gun Control Folks are Desperate if NPR is Running This

"Stagecoach" Mary Fields

NPR, yes NPR is running the story, “For Some African-Americans, Gun Ownership Underscores Segregated Past.“ No respectable news outlet would have even entertained that headline when I got into this issue 16 years ago, let alone NPR. You never would have seen the New York Times publishing a factual piece on smart gun technology by a writer known to be pro-Second Amendment. You never would have seen the Boston Globe publishing a sympathetic man with a gun pieces. For people new to this issue, these final days of the Obama Administration may seem like a strange time to declare that the media is more willing to be fair to us these days than they were two decades ago, but it’s true. If you think things are bad now, the 1990s were much worse.

15 thoughts on “You Know Gun Control Folks are Desperate if NPR is Running This”

  1. *ONLY* for African Americans, though. The rest of you barbarians are psycho-fascist, murderers.

  2. I’m just thinking out loud, but earlier today I heard the factoid offered that a great deal of Bernie Sander’s support is coming from Millennials and younger. While I won’t suggest that support for Sanders suggests anything good for gun rights, I’m suggesting that our younger generations may be better described as “left-libertarian” (no, that isn’t an oxymoron) than anything else, with that reflected as, a tolerance for both a Sanders brand of “socialism,” (or just rejection of a “capitalism” that is more fascism than capitalism) coupled with a libertarian attitude regarding people’s right to possess whatever they please, whether it’s presently controlled substances or firearms.

    In any case, if NPR is presenting pragmatic arguments for firearms ownership, and presenting them as reasonable, it certainly suggests their current staff of editors don’t regard firearms advocacy as solely the domain of hard-right loonies. I noticed that piece, 4:13 in length, was all positive regarding firearms ownership for the first 3:10, giving less than a minute at the end to a dissenting opinion.

    1. “Left libertarian” really is an oxymoron, but it is accurate given that many millennials are morons when it comes to politics.

      Really, it all comes down to education and experience; A fundamental lack of wisdom: They want to be left alone, but at the same time they also want the government to shower them with free shit. Unfortunately, they don’t have the wisdom to understand why these two desires are fundamentally in conflict.

      1. “They want to be left alone, but at the same time they also want the government to shower them with free shit.”

        That is the axiom of the millennial mind. They are forever children – they want their parents to take care of them forever but never tell them what to do. Free shit from government is just more parental money.

          1. Yes and it’s still a step above the government giving people free shit AND telling them what to do.

            1. The problem is that money = control: if someone is dependent upon you for their livelihood, they are at your mercy.

              So it is with government handouts: government has a controlling interest in those receiving such payments. This is why many of their “free shit” proposals are so insidious: “free healthcare” is a perfect example, because it would grant the government license to mandate all sorts of behavior (mandatory diet, mandatory exercise, etc.).

              In other words, “give me free shit” and “leave me the hell alone” are mutually exclusive when it comes to methods of governance.

              1. Right. This is why we the people who work hard and pay our taxes are totally in control of everything the government does. After all, we pay their salaries.

                1. The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen is literal truth. If you think that the balance of power is tilted in favor of government, why/how would an even bigger government be less abusive/power-mad?

                    1. Let me put it this way: at this point I am pretty much all in for the SMOD option. We can’t rebuild until it happens and I’d just as soon die after rebuilding, as opposed to during the process (which will take on the order of decades). The sooner it blows up the more time we have to fix it. Free shit I won’t even get any of gas nothing to do with it.

  3. I wonder how much of it is the slowly, slowly, dawning realization of those in the media that people can look up what they say.

    Take things like this:

    Eric Holder would never have dared say this in 2015, of course. And in 1996 he’d have looked at you confusedly if you had told him that just anybody would in the future be able to just yank his comments from CSPAN and be able to show it to everybody else.

    Yes that doesn’t stop some from going “Nobody wants to take your guns” months after they themselves wrote an article about how they wanted a gun ban, but it does enable the ability to refute them, no make them look ridiculous with a single URL.

    And if there’s one thing the media has a sore spot for, it’s not getting the respect they feel they’re entitled to.

  4. I remember the 1980s media craziness about guns, and yes it was much worse. I actually had a very useful chat with a CNET reporter a couple days ago.

Comments are closed.