• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Licensed Gunmen!!! New Article

E

Eric

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
9
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

If you only read the first paragraph, the only logical conclusion is that all of these shootings were self defense.

If you read the whole article, the only logical conclusion is that this is reckless journalism with a clear agenda. Truth be damned.

What are tighter gun laws going to do to prevent this? We already have laws against murder, those don't seem to prevent these senseless killings.
 
Huck

Huck

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
646
Location
Evanston, Wyoming, USA
imported post

Eric wrote:
If you only read the first paragraph, the only logical conclusion is that all of these shootings were self defense.

If you read the whole article, the only logical conclusion is that this is reckless journalism with a clear agenda. Truth be damned.

What are tighter gun laws going to do to prevent this? We already have laws against murder, those don't seem to prevent these senseless killings.
Click to expand...

IMHO, gun control laws encourage these senseless killings. Prior to the the start of gun control, in 1968, killing sprees were extremely rare.

Gun enthusiasts say there is no way to prevent human beings from committing insane acts — whether they have a gun permit or not. And studies conflict on whether stricter gun laws lessen gun violence.
Click to expand...

First of all, it's not gun violence, since guns do nothing on their own. And the only "study" anyone needs to do is to compare crime stats of places with strict gun control to places with little to no restrictions to see that strict guns laws increase violent crime. The only way anyone could not see this is because they dont want to see it because it could'nt be more obvious.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see"
 
.40 Cal

.40 Cal

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
1,379
Location
COTEP FOREVER!, North Carolina, USA
imported post

(snip)

Groups such as Vogel's, and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, say existing laws are already too weak — just look at the men who received gun permits, legally bought high-powered weapons, and then mowed down family, friends and total strangers in these past few weeks, they say.



How about that? The Vietnamese guy in Binghamton had a high powered .357 revolver. :banghead:
 
T

TatankaGap

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
193
Location
Buffalo Gap, South Dakota, USA
imported post

I emailed the AP writer at

to: info@ap.org

To the AP and Deborah Hastings,

I write to you as one of the few people you will ever meet who has actually lived through an office shooting rampage (see "101 California St. Shootings, SF, 1993").

I am curious why in your recent article " Licensed to kill? Gunmen in killings had permits" April 7, 2009, you take the time to quote 2 gun control advocates - Mr. Vogel of Freedom States Alliance and the Brady Campaign and you go on to quote another gun control advocate from the US Conference of Mayors.

You don't dig too deep to find any pro-gun rights advocates - there are millions of responsible gun owners including millions of responsible carry permit holders. Just because the NRA wouldn't give a statement, doesn't mean you are done.

Journalists are supposed to uncover multiple points of view and report them - at least if the goal is an unbiased media reporting facts to the public. If the goal is something else, that's not journalism but merely publication of propaganda.

Where is the quote from Gun Owners of America? Where is the quote from the United States Concealed Carry Association? Where is the quote from the members of Open Carry.org?

Your one-sided reporting only serves to create more dissension and division in our society at a time when coming together and healing should be the watchword of the day.

Fact is, with about 300 million guns in America, and with the recent Supreme Court ruling in DC v Heller that a handgun for self-defense and defense against tyranny is an absolute right that pre-exists and is protected by the Second Amendment, it is clear that using these tragedies as an excuse to further anti-gun rights agendas is nothing more than political opportunism.

The NRA refrained from engaging in that kind of political opportunism but the anti-gun rights people are not shy about it. As a journalist, it is up to you to dig deeper and reveal multiple opinions rather than use your article as a chance to promote an anti-gun rights agenda.

Sincerely,
 
Washintonian_For_Liberty

Washintonian_For_Liberty

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
922
Location
Mercer Island, Washington, USA
imported post

TatankaGap wrote:
I emailed the AP writer at

to: info@ap.org

To the AP and Deborah Hastings,

I write to you as one of the few people you will ever meet who has actually lived through an office shooting rampage (see "101 California St. Shootings, SF, 1993").

I am curious why in your recent article " Licensed to kill? Gunmen in killings had permits" April 7, 2009, you take the time to quote 2 gun control advocates - Mr. Vogel of Freedom States Alliance and the Brady Campaign and you go on to quote another gun control advocate from the US Conference of Mayors.

You don't dig too deep to find any pro-gun rights advocates - there are millions of responsible gun owners including millions of responsible carry permit holders. Just because the NRA wouldn't give a statement, doesn't mean you are done.

Journalists are supposed to uncover multiple points of view and report them - at least if the goal is an unbiased media reporting facts to the public. If the goal is something else, that's not journalism but merely publication of propaganda.

Where is the quote from Gun Owners of America? Where is the quote from the United States Concealed Carry Association? Where is the quote from the members of Open Carry.org?

Your one-sided reporting only serves to create more dissension and division in our society at a time when coming together and healing should be the watchword of the day.

Fact is, with about 300 million guns in America, and with the recent Supreme Court ruling in DC v Heller that a handgun for self-defense and defense against tyranny is an absolute right that pre-exists and is protected by the Second Amendment, it is clear that using these tragedies as an excuse to further anti-gun rights agendas is nothing more than political opportunism.

The NRA refrained from engaging in that kind of political opportunism but the anti-gun rights people are not shy about it. As a journalist, it is up to you to dig deeper and reveal multiple opinions rather than use your article as a chance to promote an anti-gun rights agenda.

Sincerely,
Click to expand...

Nice... I was too steamed after reading that propaganda piece to think about writing her... and I had several coding jobs that I had to finish by day end.... leaving me little time to compose myself enough to write something as well written as this.

Thanks!
 
S

Slayer of Paper

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
460
Location
Phoenix, Arizona, USA
imported post

I rather enjoyed the article. It came across to me as antis whining about how the American public still isn't supporting gun control despite the recent shootings.

First, it sounded to me like the antis were unhappy- always a good thing.

Second, it gives me hope. The fact that despite all of the calls by antis to do something about the recent rash of shootings, people are not listening, and indeed, are continuing to buy guns and ammo at a record-breaking pace. This to me says that more and more people are realizing that gun laws do nothing whatsoever to stop crime, and that the police can't protect them- they'll have to take responsibility for protecting themselves.

When antis sound like the guy that wrote this article, things are looking up. They sound frustrated, angry, and even a little scared.
 
SAvage410

SAvage410

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
187
Location
Falls Church, Virginia, USA
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote
The damnation of America is the consideration of all fact as mere opinion, and true only if agreeable. Disagreeable facts must be somehow corrupt and should be ignored. Our doom.
Click to expand...
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views ... which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering."

This was mis-attributed to Dr. Who, but darned if I can find a reference to the real source. Still true regardless of who said it first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top