The Media – Page 59 – Shall Not Be Questioned

The Media Roundup

SayUncle also has a roundup of the media mistakes during this whole thing.

I didn’t watch any of the TV media coverage, and I’ve been ignoring print media, because quite honestly, I can’t tolerate their coverage of events like this.

The media is just as culpable in these types of tragedies as the gun, which they are so eager to place blame on, because I think the media sensationalism it causes plays into the fantasies of these types of killers.Â I’m very worried about copycats in the coming days.

But I don’t blame the media for the tragedy. Â The 24 hour live news cycle is part of our society now, and we have a free press.Â I totally accept the media’s right to cover these events. Â I just with they’d respect my right to bear arms as much as I respect their freedom of press.Â I don’t appreciate a lot of the scapegoating on guns, while the media refuses to acknowledge that the may have a role to play in these as well.

Sam Katz Blog

Sam Katz, who has run for mayor on the Republican ticket back as far as I can remember, has a blog, apparently.Â He’s offering advise to the current Mayoral candidates.Â At least the Philadelphia media is calling it a blog.Â Â This looks more like a column to me.Â I think the media is a bit challenged on what a blog is.

Media Boogeymen

John Stossel writes about the media concentrating on stories that scare people. It’s really good stuff, and worth reading the whole thing. The part relevant for us is:

Here’s another example. What do you think is more dangerous, a house with a pool or a house with a gun? When, for “20/20,” I asked some kids, all said the house with the gun is more dangerous. I’m sure their parents would agree. Yet a child is 100 times more likely to die in a swimming pool than in a gun accident.

Parents don’t know that partly because the media hate guns and gun accidents make bigger headlines. Ask yourself which incident would be more likely to be covered on TV.

Media exposure clouds our judgment about real-life odds. Of course, it doesn’t help that viewers are as ignorant about probability as reporters are.

I’m glad to see media figures finally talking about this issue. I it’s never been so much a bias, though I will concede that’s an issue, but more the fact that reporters don’t tend to be well educated on a broad variety of subjects. Thus, they gravitate towards stories that will get them notoriety, and lack the knowledge to keep their bullshit detectors well maintained and in good working order.

Hat Tip: Michael Bane

Not Bad Press

I think Gun Law News just got us all some good press from Fox News:

“The amazing thing about Zumbo was, he posted it on Friday night and by Monday there was a mushroom cloud,” said Jeff, a gun-rights advocate who runs GunLawNews.org and did not want to be identified by his full name. “I think it teaches a lesson to those who are listening that the power of the Net should not be underestimated.”

He’s not happy about the segments used, but I think overall this isn’t bad press. I don’t, however, really appreciate how NRA vs. Bloggers was played up though:

While Cox said the NRA is able to “update our members in real time” on legislative alerts and other perceived threats to their cause, some bloggers say their online network has allowed them to report stories even faster.

“Blogs covering gun rights provide the same immediacy of coverage and action as others do that cover more general politics,” said Soyer. “Blogs are on the story as it happens.”

Miller suggests that blogs have evolved to the point that they can go around the NRA hierarchy to communicate with millions of people on their own.

“I think bloggers have diluted the power of the NRA,” said Miller. “If I find an atrocity done by my elected official in my state, I donâ€™t have to contact the NRA and tell them to get on it. It can be passed along where it does not have to go through the bottleneck, where the NRA puts its own spin on it.”

Cox said, however, that the NRA is at the heart of the grassroots effort. “Both our friends and enemies agree that when it comes to making a difference, when it comes to grassroots activism, no one does it better than the NRA.”

Bloggers are important, and we’re definitely not the NRA lapdogs the press and Brady Campaign would make us out to be (as my position on the workplace carry bills should convince anyone), but we’re all essentially on the same side, and we both need each other.

Car Carry in Georgia Article

We’ve come to expect pretty biased coverage on our issue from the media, but I think this article from the Atlanta Journal Constitution is actually pretty balanced, presenting both sides of the issue. I applaud them for seeking out law enforcement opinions that basically say that criminals already hide guns in their car, despite what the law says, and taking time to actually research the issue.

UPDATE: Bitter doesn’t agree, and thinks it’s more anti-gun.Â Given the media market I generally belong to, it’s balanced compared to anything I generally read in the Inquirer, which generally only produces articles not fit to use as toilet paper when it comes to the gun issue.

Bradys Bad Mouthing Good Gun Shops

This, rather shocking Philadelphia Inquirer article, shocking in the sense that it’s not virulently anti-gun, tells a tale of a Bucks County, PA (my county of residence, north of the city) gun shop that got wrongly blacklisted by the Brady Bunch:

Which is what happened last month when the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence released a report, “Shady Dealings: Illegal Gun Trafficking from Licensed Gun Dealers.” Tanner’s store was featured as one of the scurrilous.

What the Brady Center didn’t know is that the sale had been a sting, arranged in cooperation with the local office of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The rest of the article goes into more detail. They do get one thing wrong though:

While he considers the fine points, the woman will wander around, utterly uninterested. But when they’re ready to buy, she’ll be the one filling out the paperwork. If it can be proved she bought the guns for the man, it is a “straw purchase” – a felony.

This isn’t necessarily a straw purchase, since you are allowed to purchase firearms as gifts. Even in Pennsylvania, where private sales of handguns are generally illegal, there is an exception for spouses, and immediate family members.

But overall, it’s good to see stuff like this. I will have to send the Philadelphia Inquirer some praise for printing a good, balanced article on the issue. Oh, and Tanner managed to get an apology out of the Brady’s and a retraction, after getting a lot of phone calls from irate customers who read a newspaper article on the Brady’s report. I would have hoped that gun shop patrons would know ahead of time that the Brady’s are full of crap.

Hair Questions Only Please

I don’t know if anyone saw the guys that put up the guerrilla marketing LED devices all over Boston give their press conference, but I would highly recommend it, because it’s a total riot. Click on the “TOP VIDEO” link on that story. If I can find a better video feed, I will post it. Looks like their attorney advised them to say nothing about the case, and they decided to have a bit of fun with the press:

“I feel like my hair is pretty perfect but altogether I want to redirect this to the haircuts of the ’70s,” Berdovsky said, ignoring reporters’ shouts.“I really like the one where the hair curls around to the back,” Stevens replied.

“Oh yeah, that oneâ€™s so hot,” Berdovsky then responded.

Frustrated reporters, trying to get the pair to respond to serious questions about the incident that at one point involved the participation of the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, finally tossed a question that gave one of them cause to reflect.

When asked whether they were afraid their hair might be cut if they are sent to prison, Berdovsky stopped his rant and answered, “Whatever happens I feel that my hair is safe at the moment.”

Kudos to them for treating this like the steaming pile of bullshit that it is. The only people at fault here are the authorities for overreacting. People should be pissed at their government, not these two guys. It should be obvious to anyone who doesn’t have severe brain damage (i.e. not Boston and Massachusetts politicians) that these devices were NOT bombs, and were not intended to be threatening:

“It’s clear the intent was to get attention by causing fear and unrest that there was a bomb in that location,” Assistant Attorney General John Grossman said at their arraignment.The surreal series is about a talking milkshake, a box of fries and a meatball. The network is a division of Turner Broadcasting Systems Inc.

The 1-foot tall signs, which were lit up at night, resembled a circuit board, with protruding wires and batteries. Most depicted a boxy, cartoon character giving passersby the finger â€” a more obvious sight when darkness fell.

“It is outrageous, in a post 9/11 world, that a company would use this type of marketing scheme,” Menino said Wednesday. “I am prepared to take any and all legal action against Turner Broadcasting and its affiliates for any and all expenses incurred during the response to today’s incidents.”

You’ve got to be kidding me? Mumbles Menino can go to hell and so can the Massachusetts AAG. I don’t think their charges of planting a hoax device will stick, and I really hope they go after these clowns for malicious prosecution. If you live in Massachusetts, and you like it there, I think you need to lay off the crack. At the very least, you need to start electing better people to run your government.

UPDATE: Bruce at mAssBackwards makes a really good point.Â But first instincts, I would think, is that a brightly colored LED display with a cartoon like figure on it is not, in fact, a terrorist explosive device, and maybe out to be checked out, but not create absolute panic.Â Bruce does have a good point, though, and I’ll agree that being cautious and checking out the devices was warranted.Â But I still strongly comdemn the Boston authorities reaction in the aftermath.Â Plus Turner came forward and claimed responsbility for the signs, and they were ignored!Â Then the city went ape shit and starting throwing bogus charges around.

Quote of the Day

From Jerry Shores in Pinellas Park, Florida, in response to the St. Petersburg Times tirade about Florida’s gun licensing system:

Finally, and again using your reported numbers, there are 408,250 law-abiding, concealed carrying Floridians who have the means to defend themselves and their loved ones (and perhaps you and your loved ones as well) from an attack by an armed criminal. Frankly, I’m much more comforted by that thought than I am by the prospect that all I have to answer a criminal’s armed assault is your paper’s righteous indignation.

Zing! Good comeback.

h/t: Dave Hardy

The Media Assault

It definitely seems the media is currently engaged in a full court press against gun rights. But Why? And what does it mean? Believe it or not, I don’t think this necessarily is bad news for gun owners, but that doesn’t mean we can relax and stop being vigilant. It’s times like this that are important, but not because it’s a sign we’re about to start losing.

The main reason we’re seeing this media blitz is because of the Democrats taking over the legislative branch and generally gaining power. The anti-gun groups will be doing everything they can to get the gun issue back into the spotlight, so expect a lot of press releases, deception, and lying. And we must be aggressive about calling them out for it, and not let them an inch of breathing room.

This is an act of desperation, not an act of strength. The anti-gun groups know that if the Democrats actually abandon their issue, they are dead politically for the foreseeable future. I am not optimistic that we have won over the Democrats enough that they will actively work for us, but I think we have scared them enough that they are afraid to work against us, and that’s a tremendous accomplishment. But we have to keep them scared.

Keeping up the fight will mean writing letters to the editor challenging anti-gun editorials, and biased and inaccurate reporting. It will mean writing letters to politicians and your represenatives and making sure they are aware of your opinion on these issues. Probably most importantly, and I know a lot of people don’t like to hear this, it means making sure your NRA membership is current, and if it’s not, joining. Keep up your membership in the other groups if you like (I do) but the NRA is who the politicians in Washington and the state houses pay attention to, and how much attention the politicians pay is directly proportional to how many votes they bring to the table. Who knows, if we’re effective enough, we may even be able to get the Democrats to figure out they have more to gain by working with us than against us. Imagine how demoralized that would make you feel if you were a Brady supporter?

Being Full of Crap Is Dangerous

According to Clifford M. Herman, over at the Seattle Post Intelligencer, bowing down to the NRA is dangerous. Let’s take a look at what he has to say:

The arguments favoring the private ownership of handguns in this country are based on two myths.The first myth is that the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees private citizens the right to own handguns.

The fact is this. The Second Amendment, in its entirety, states “A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The National Rifle Association has succeeded brilliantly and cynically in convincing the public that the amendment consists only of the part that follows the comma.

You should check your facts, because most of the recent scholarship out on the second amendment has rejected this model and embraced an individual rights view. Even liberal scholars, such as Larry Tribe have embraced an individual rights model of the Second Amendment.

The second myth is that every private citizen needs a handgun to protect his loved ones and property against intrusion by burglars. This is a pernicious untruth. As a longtime trauma surgeon at Harborview Medical Center, the main center for treatment of all kinds of wounds and injuries, I cannot recall a single patient who had been shot by the resident of a private home while attempting to burglarize it. I believe my surgical colleagues would agree with that assessment. It is far more likely that a young boy finds a loaded handgun in his parents’ bedside table and either he or a playmate gets shot while playing with it.

This would be news to Dr. Gary Kleck, criminologist at Florida State University, who’s studies estimate about two and a half million defensive gun uses annually, the vast majority of which do not result in anyone being shot. Most criminals break off the attack when confronted with someone prepared and willing to defend themselves. The truth is there are many of these types of defensive uses around the country every day, if you had ever bothered to look.

Those are the two myths responsible for the ubiquitous presence and use of handguns in Seattle and elsewhere in this country. They attest to the ignorance of our citizens and our laziness in not even reading and learning the history of the Second Amendment to our Constitution.

I’m sorry sir, but it is you who are the lazy and ignorant one, not us. It’s not exactly a good way to persuade folks by claiming that of people who simply don’t agree with you. Honestly, it makes you look like an arrogant prick. Handguns are ubiquitous and present in our country because Americans, whether you accept it or not, have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms to defend themselves and their families. Read what the founders have to say about the subject, and you’ll understand why you are wrong. People aren’t ignorant just because they choose to make the wise decision not to rely on the police, who can’t always be everywhere when some criminal chooses us as his mark.

The obvious truth is that only police and other law-enforcement officials should be allowed to have handguns in this country. Private citizens have no legitimate use or need for them, and they should be barred from possessing them. Period

So do you want to pay to have the police follow me around everywhere? No? Then don’t be so arrogant as to presume to make choices for me when it comes to my own personal security. Stick to medicine doc. Leave the gun subject to the people who actually know what the hell they are talking about.