The Media – Page 23 – Shall Not Be Questioned

The Weekly Standard to the Bathyscaph WaPo

It’s got to be difficult getting the message down so far in the tank, but Mark Hemingway of the Weekly Standard is trying:

And the NRA bears responsibility here how? There is no concievable law enforcement scenario where putting 2,500 guns into the hands of criminals would be justifiable. Ever. The ATF should take it’s lumps, and anyone who suggests that gun rights advocates are to be blamed here should have their head examined.

I’m going to agree with Mr. Hemingway’s assertion that we ought to get to the bottom of this before drawing conclusions. To anyone who isn’t the Washington Post editorial board, that’s really the most sensible thing.

Fast and Furious All NRA’s Fault

That would appear to be the conclusion of the Washington Post.

Now, the very critics who have tied the bureauâ€™s hands are expressing outrage over a novel, and we would agree questionable, ATF operation intended to curb gun smuggling into Mexico.

If they get any deeper in the tank for this Administration, they are going to need one of these. Their conclusions do not fit what’s come out so far in the hearings. We know, for instance, that ATF did not “lose track” of these weapons. They did not bother to track them at all.

Apologist Media Still in the Tank for the O Man

The Washington Post, represented in this case by one of our favorite anti-gun reporters, Sari Horwitz, smears Congressman Issa and continues to attempt to deflect blame away from the Administration and ATF when it comes to the Fast and Furious scandal. This is in sharp contrast to the New York Post, which is commending Issa for the investigation and egging it further on.

The Post has a source that claims that Issa was briefed on the operation last year, and raised no objections. I’m going to bet that actively encouraging straw purchasing was not on the list of things the DOJ would have included in their briefing to Congress. It’s one thing to report “how many guns had been bought by ‘straw purchasers,’ the types of guns and how much money had been spent,” it’s quite another to understand that these were straw purchases, which otherwise would not have been made, that were actively encouraged by the agency. It’s also even quite yet another thing to report that ATF did not even bother to track the vast majority of those firearms.

The Washington Post doesn’t seem to make any pretense of objective reporting anymore. They ought to be viewed as the shills for the Administration that they indeed are.

The New York Times Definitely Doesn’t Get It

Naturally the editorial board of the paper of ~~making up the~~ record is doing their level best to place the blame over Fast and Furious on our gun laws:

Congress needs to be candid about how loophole-ridden laws have created a huge market for assault weapons, which end up in Mexico. At a hearing, Mr. Issa insisted, â€œWeâ€™re not here to talk about proposed gun legislation.â€ Federal officials in February sought authority to require gun dealers to report bulk sales of assault rifles only to have it blocked by a provision in the Republican budget. A responsible Congress would re-enact the assault weapons ban, outlaw uncontrolled gun-show sales and reform regulations that allow corrupt dealers to stay in business.

There’s no gun law in the world, save prohibition, which is constitutionally problematic, that’s going to prevent ATF from actively encouraging straw sales that dealers otherwise would not have made. I know this sounds crazy to an outfit as stupidly ignorant as the Times, but gun dealers actually don’t want to sell guns to criminals. If someone comes into your store wanting to buy a dozen AKs, that generally wouldn’t pass the sniff test. ATF was deliberately encouraging those kinds of sales and it has obviously wildly inflated the number of firearms ending up in the hands of smuggling rings.

If the NYT really wants to close a loophole, maybe they should call for abolishing the ATF.

Getting the Message Out

As much as people blog, I really hate that gun owners don’t do more letters to the editor in their regional papers. Take this letter from Marion Hammer down in Florida:

Sue Carlton is calling out St. Petersburg Mayor Bill Foster for respecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners and not joining a New York City gun control organization that lobbies against the rights of honest citizens.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s organization, Mayor Against Illegal Guns, is not about illegal guns; it is a front for gun control activities against law-abiding gun owners.

She proceeds to outline the many ways that MAIG has lobbied for gun control which have nothing to do with illegal guns. Believe it or not, but letters to the editor are still a great way to communicate. While newspapers might be on the decline, they still reach a broader audience on a daily basis than the vast majority of blogs do in 6 months. And, for purposes of Google-magic, newspaper content is often ranked higher than regular websites.

Next time there’s an anti-gun piece in your local paper, respond to it. When the message is from someone local, it makes a bigger impact.

Easy Availability

The Inquirer, probably reeling from the same slow news cycle even I’m lamenting, decides to bring out one of the media’s favorite deceased equines for a good flogging:

The easy availability of handguns, legal or not, poses a serious challenge to public safety. That’s why mayors, including Nutter, in dozens of communities across the state need to keep pushing for tighter controls on the purchase of handguns that end up being resold to criminals.

No policy prescriptions, no serious analysis of how criminals are getting handguns, it’s just too easy. End of debate. That is as far as their intellectual exploration of the topic will go. Because a couple of gang members shot up a night club, the rest of us have to pay the price in sacrificed freedom.

Campus Carry Movement in The Atlantic

The author is not sympathetic to our cause, but doesn’t deny the momentum. I’m particularly amused by this:

If the bill in Texas becomes law, some professors there have said they plan to include a clause in syllabi stipulating that students are not be permitted to carry guns into their classroom — and then simply refuse to teach classes where students don’t assent.

There is also a bill to permit open-carry pending in the legislature, but if that doesn’t pass, how are you going to know? I seriously don’t think these folks consider they run into people carrying every day and never realize it. Back to the writer:

When you think of it like that: giving guns to young students largely interested in sex and booze, I’d wager it seems less of a genius idea.

Who’s talking about giving guns to young students? No one is giving away guns here. We’re talking about people who have licenses to carry everywhere else in public. It’s amazing to me how well our opponents frame their rhetoric. They speak of us as being fear mongers, but the truth is they are the greatest fear mongers of all, buy planting thoughts in the public mind that evoke images of Wayne LaPierre handing out Glocks as kids go into the lecture hall. This is ludicrous. It’s almost amazing this is even an issue given the very small number of people who are ever going to be toting guns to class.

Stevens Media Amends Righthaven Deal

Vegas Inc has the details of the amended copyright assignment. This would seem to be an admission that the previous assignment was flawed, which to me should mean they need to return all the settlement money. Also interesting is that the new deal calls for Stevens Media to pay one dollar per year in royalties, with 10 dollars as the repurchase price.

This, of course, begs the question as to exactly how Righthaven can claim damages into the hundreds of thousands of dollars over an interest which is at most a dollar a year, and is valued at ten dollars.

New York Times and Due Process

I doubt the New York Times would editorialize against any other part of the Bill of Rights in such a way as this:

Here is a chilling and potentially lethal fact of life: A person on the F.B.I.â€™s terrorist watch list is barred from boarding an airplane yet is quite free to buy high-power firearms and ammunition at any American gun shop.

How about this:

Here is a chilling and potentially lethal fact of life: A person on the F.B.I.â€™s terrorist watch list is barred from boarding an airplane yet is quite free to buy books on military tactics and infiltration techniques at any American book store.

Or this:

Here is a chilling and potentially lethal fact of life: A person on the F.B.I.â€™s terrorist watch list is barred from boarding an airplane yet are not being detained in military brigs, and are free to walk any American street.

Or finally this:

Here is a chilling and potentially lethal fact of life: A person on the F.B.I.â€™s terrorist watch list is barred from boarding an airplane yet is still entitled to continue practicing Islam in any American mosque.

No. All those other things I mentioned are fundamental rights the New York Times agrees with and would defend viciously. Clearly the editorial staff at the Times has not yet accepted the full implications of Heller and McDonald, which is that you can’t deny someone the right to buy a gun because of their presence on a secret government list.

Making up for Sexism?

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review notes, positively this time, NRA’s efforts to attract women at the convention coming up at the end of the week.