Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Surprise (gasp!) Press tells only half of story on Bull's Eye Shooter Supply

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Regular Member gsx1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    884

    Post imported post

    Just wrote a comment in there. I honestly was wondering the same thing. I was going to call and see if they were going to stay open. My wife was so happy with the service she pushed me into buying my Ruger 10/22 from them. And we'll be going back to get her the Sig 229 that she wants.

    It sucks that they are getting F'd over like this because the guy behind the counter was not at all like most of the ******** at other gun shops. If there's one thing the gun industry lacks it's quality of service. Bulls eye seems to be stepping up in that dept.
    "Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world." ~ Musashi

  3. #3
    Regular Member Squeak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Port Orchard,
    Posts
    827

    Post imported post

    gsx1138 wrote:
    Just wrote a comment in there. I honestly was wondering the same thing. I was going to call and see if they were going to stay open. My wife was so happy with the service she pushed me into buying my Ruger 10/22 from them. And we'll be going back to get her the Sig 229 that she wants.

    It sucks that they are getting F'd over like this because the guy behind the counter was not at all like most of the @#$%s at other gun shops. If there's one thing the gun industry lacks it's quality of service. Bulls eye seems to be stepping up in that dept.
    Post his address so we can give him some support

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post

    Bull's Eye Shooter Supply
    414 A Puyallup Ave.
    Tacoma, WA 98421

    (253) 572 - 6417

  5. #5
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    [size=
    Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply, located where it has always been, on Tacoma’s Puyallup Avenue, is still in business, and business is thriving. Kindschuh reported Monday afternoon
    ][/size]

    The same store that back in March was ripping off gun purchasers ??...

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_to...light=bullseye

  6. #6
    Regular Member gsx1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    884

    Post imported post

    I'm not buying that. But then every experience is different.

    M1Gunr wrote:
    [size=
    Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply, located where it has always been, on Tacoma’s Puyallup Avenue, is still in business, and business is thriving. Kindschuh reported Monday afternoon
    ]

    The same store that back in March was ripping off gun purchasers ??...

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_to...light=bullseye
    "Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world." ~ Musashi

  7. #7
    Regular Member SpyderTattoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,018

    Post imported post

    I bought myveryfirstfirearm from Bryan, the original owner, way back when his "gun shop" was actually in his basement, 1994. This was a couple years before he moved into the current shop.
    Certified Glock Armorer

    "A government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen..." -- Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)

    A 1911 that works properly is as rare as a Glock that doesn't.

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    And where was all this same attention when the TNT ran a front page story in a positive light on Cascade Arms in Olympia? Or the one they did on a dealer of black powder guns who had been in business for a couple of decades? And those two are just off the top of my head.

    Fact. OLD owner of Bullseye, the one who let the DC Sniper get ahold of an AR lost his FFL. Fact. That was recently upheld in court. There was an ommission in the article, but since the NEW FFL has nothing to do with the OLD FFL, and has apparently made an effort to distance themselves from the OLD FFL, I see little reason to bring up the NEW and UNRELATED FFL in this piece.

    Come on Dave, next time a local paper runs a positive gun article, I expect you to spill as much ink over it too.

  9. #9
    Regular Member killchain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    The guy got sued for someone stealing a gun from him and using it to kill?

    Sure, he botched the paperwork and didn't report it, but come on. That's like suing me for someone stealing my truck and crashing it into a store.
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    And where was all this same attention when the TNT ran a front page story in a positive light on Cascade Arms in Olympia?* Or the one they did on a dealer of black powder guns who had been in business for a couple of decades?* And those two are just off the top of my head.

    Fact.* OLD owner of Bullseye, the one who let the DC Sniper get ahold of an AR lost his FFL.* Fact.* That was recently upheld in court.* There was an ommission in the article, but since the NEW FFL has nothing to do with the OLD FFL, and has apparently made an effort to distance themselves from the OLD FFL, I see little reason to bring up the NEW and UNRELATED FFL in this piece.*

    Come on Dave, next time a local paper runs a positive gun article, I expect you to spill as much ink over it too.*
    This is not about the News Tribune and you know it. It's about sloppy reporting.

    Tuesday morning I notice the Associated Press piece picked up on the P-I website is corrected.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Fact. OLD owner of Bullseye, the one who let the DC Sniper get ahold of an AR lost his FFL. Fact. That was recently upheld in court. There was an ommission in the article, but since the NEW FFL has nothing to do with the OLD FFL, and has apparently made an effort to distance themselves from the OLD FFL, I see little reason to bring up the NEW and UNRELATED FFL in this piece.
    Unrelated? The guy owns the same store that they are reporting as having lost their FFL? All they had to do was change the story to say "the former owner" and it would have been both accurate and non-damaging to the current owners of the business.

    Edit: In fact, going back and rereading the article, just in the interests of accuracy in my comments, they specifically say that Bull's Eye is not getting their license back. They don't even mention that it is the former owner, not the current owner, that lost his FFL.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Fact. OLD owner of Bullseye, the one who let the DC Sniper get ahold of an AR lost his FFL. Fact. That was recently upheld in court. There was an ommission in the article, but since the NEW FFL has nothing to do with the OLD FFL, and has apparently made an effort to distance themselves from the OLD FFL, I see little reason to bring up the NEW and UNRELATED FFL in this piece.
    Unrelated? The guy owns the same store that they are reporting as having lost their FFL? All they had to do was change the story to say "the former owner" and it would have been both accurate and non-damaging to the current owners of the business.
    My friend, you have nailed it.

    This morning - now that my column has evidently made the rounds - they're getting the story straight without admitting they screwed up the first time.





  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    194

    Post imported post

    killchain wrote:
    The guy got sued for someone stealing a gun from him and using it to kill?

    Sure, he botched the paperwork and didn't report it, but come on. That's like suing me for someone stealing my truck and crashing it into a store.

    Sadly that happens too... Get this. There is a residential street (Residential in that there are houses along the busy road - they won't put speedbumps there) in Albuquerque, New Mexico. A guy in the middle of the night decides to speed, doesn't notice the corner and hits the curb sending his car flying into someone's brick wall fence. Now, the couple who live there are having problem's because apparently there is a dispute about who should be paying for the fence. Unfortunately the car was stolen, so the insurance agency wants to sue the cars real owner back in California! So it does happen... But on top of that just to expand on the story a bit more... The arguement was still ensuing, and another car hit the same curb while speeding and landed in their living room becausenoone had rebuilttheir fence.






  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,268

    Post imported post

    killchain wrote:
    The guy got sued for someone stealing a gun from him and using it to kill?

    Sure, he botched the paperwork and didn't report it, but come on. That's like suing me for someone stealing my truck and crashing it into a store.
    You do know that therehave beeninstances where the owner of a stolen vehicle has been held liable for chrashes with the vehicle if the crash happened before the vehicle was reported stolen?

    It sucks, but it has and probably will continue to happen.

  15. #15
    Regular Member killchain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    David.Car wrote:
    killchain wrote:
    The guy got sued for someone stealing a gun from him and using it to kill?

    Sure, he botched the paperwork and didn't report it, but come on. That's like suing me for someone stealing my truck and crashing it into a store.
    You do know that therehave beeninstances where the owner of a stolen vehicle has been held liable for chrashes with the vehicle if the crash happened before the vehicle was reported stolen?

    It sucks, but it has and probably will continue to happen.
    Well that's some crap too. I hate stupid laws.
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

  16. #16
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Dave Workman wrote:
    This is not about the News Tribune and you know it. It's about sloppy reporting.

    Tuesday morning I notice the Associated Press piece picked up on the P-I website is corrected.
    No Dave, I think this is about you getting worked up over an error that later got corrected, and you twisting it into yet another media bias story which is fashionable amongst people when they have nothing else to complain about. Meanwhile, if the AP is running the corrected article, what's the biggie? An article can evolve several times. Very standard in the industry for decades.... I've seen AP articles (usually based off of reporting from member agencies) change three or four times or more as a day or several days progress and information is revised to be more accurate. I'm guessing it's a slow news day at The Examiner?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Dave Workman wrote:
    This is not about the News Tribune and you know it. It's about sloppy reporting.

    Tuesday morning I notice the Associated Press piece picked up on the P-I website is corrected.
    No Dave, I think this is about you getting worked up over an error that later got corrected, and you twisting it into yet another media bias story which is fashionable amongst people when they have nothing else to complain about.* Meanwhile, if the AP is running the corrected article, what's the biggie?* An article can evolve several times.* Very standard in the industry for decades....* I've seen AP articles (usually based off of reporting from member agencies) change three or four times or more as a day or several days progress and information is revised to be more accurate.* I'm guessing it's a slow news day at The Examiner?*

    Well, you can think whatever you want.

    I didn't get "worked up," I covered an egregious error that is causing no small amount of grief for the present owner of the Bull's Eye Shooter Supply. I spoke to him yesterday and today. Have you spoken to him?

    I've already spoken with two other reporters who agreed with my take. That is, people in the business. Were you in on those conversations?

    Yeah, the error is getting corrected, and do you know why? Because I published that column and made damn sure other news agencies got it. The corrections did not start until after that column circulated.

    This isn't about bias near so much as it is about laziness, and telling half of a story.

  18. #18
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    I wouldn't shop at Bullseye if you paid me. Beyond that, the title of your article suggests anything but you calling out laziness.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    591

    Post imported post

    wow, lots of conceitedness

    or maybe they researched it some moreand found they made a mistake and corrected it.

    there's no I in Team,

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    I wouldn't shop at Bullseye if you paid me.* Beyond that, the title of your article suggests anything but you calling out laziness.*
    Well, your prejudice is certainly showing through. Your personal beef with Bull's Eye has zip to do with what occurred. But it certainly explains why you have no concern about how the story as initially reported has caused the store a lot of grief.

  21. #21
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Not really, I don't carry that kind of grudges against stores in a different county than I live. I just personally have no use for them. And that is a handy way of ignoring my charge that your title suggests a claim of deliberate media bias.

    Strangely enough, errors do happen in reporting. Is your article about an error, or a claim of deliberate omission? You make it sound like an organized media conspiracy, which is what I'm complaining about.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •