Category: The Media

Man, this editorial is filled with so much ignorance, I can’t even begin to pick it apart.

Such extraordinary firepower is not meant for hunting animals or target shooting. We see only one other purpose. And so did Murray.

If I had a dime for every time someone said that a rifle firing a medium power cartridge, is too “extraordinarily powerful” for civilian use, I’d be a rich man.  The .223 is indeed unsuited to deer hunting, because it’s not powerful enough.  Of course, there are AR-15s that are built in calibers suitable for deer, and people use them.

[…] state lawmakers, in Colorado and elsewhere, ought to follow the example of Maryland, which just enacted the Assault Weapons Ban of 2007. (It would mean amending a law now on the books.)

Maryland passed an assault weapons ban in 2007?  That’s news to me.  I’m pretty sure the correct fact is that one was propsed, and second amendment activists in Maryland defeated it.  A little research never hurts, unless you’re an “authorized journalist”, in which case it must be obviously painful, since they never do it.

During the ban, the number of assault weapons linked to crimes dropped. The proportion of banned assault weapons traced to crime dropped by two-thirds from 1995 to 2004.

It did?  I could swear the actual facts from a CDC study done on the issue showed it to be ineffective.

Frankly, we can’t figure out the benefits of having assault weapons easily available. Law enforcement officers universally agree that people wanting self protection don’t carry assault weapons. But criminals do.

If they are so ineffective for self protection, then did they ever think maybe they should ask the police why they carry them?  Well, it’s not the only bit of logical analysis that’s missing fro this piece.

This time from Colin McEnroe of the Hartford Courant:

I agree that it was a lucky thing that Jeanne Assam was there in church in Colorado Springs with a gun she used to stop a homicidal maniac; but only in America’s completely crazy gun culture would this be cited as proof that the system works. A guy shows up at a church with two handguns, an assault rifle and 1,000 rounds of ammuition, kills two young women and wounds their father; and we’re supposed to think that’s a good day in the life of Gunfighter Nation because somebody else had a gun too?

I’m seeing this theme a lot “I agree what this woman did was good, but guns are bad!” So clearly the solution is to make sure women like this are defenseless? The guy in the Omaha shooting was prohibited by federal law from purchasing a gun, but he got one anyway. Here’s what he would like to see from us:

“Hey, I’m not really down with gun control, but I can see, lately, that assault weapons are getting into the hands of crazy people, and maybe we need to take a look at that.”

I don’t disagree, but first you have to tell me what an assault weapon is? Seems simple. Kind of like what Justice Potter Stewart said of Pornography “I know it when I see it.” But how to define it? Assault weapons function the same as other ordinary firearms. How do you make a legal distinction between a “dangerous assault weapon” and a self-loading target or hunting rifle?

How about “Why are there so many crazy people and people with long criminal histories roaming our streets in the first place?” Is that something to look at as well?

It’s good to see some police chiefs have some common sense.

Randall Williams, spokesman for the Anderson City Police Department, said all firearms are a concern for law enforcement.

“That rifle is not any different from any other firearm,” he said. “We’re concerned about all firearms being in the wrong hands.”

They even manage to talk to some gun shop owners who manage not to say anything stupid.  The reporter should also be commended for bothering to do research.

Nebraska is considering a whole host of bills, according to this article that contains a number of inaccurate statements.

Action Three News has obtained a “get tough on guns” plan that was in the works even before last week’s shooting. The plan, that will be fought out in the legislature next month, aims to keep guns out of the hands of minors.

But it stops short of banning assault weapons, the kind of weapon that left 8 innocent people dead. According to investigators the rapid fire inside the Von Maur department store, came from a weapon that was bought legally and did not have to be registered in the State of Nebraska.

Police Chief Thomas Warren says the suspect, Robert Hawkins, stole the weapon, an AK-47 military style assault rifle, from his stepfather.

It was purchased legally, but he stole the weapon. I’m having a difficult time parsing that.

State Senator Brad Ashford tells Action Three News he is now pursuing a new law that would force gun owners to store their weapons securily away from minors, and to report a lost or stolen gun to police within 48 hours of detecting that the weapon is missing. However, Ashford’s new legislation falls far short of a ban on assault weapons.

OK, Hawkins wasn’t a minor, so that wouldn’t have helped anything here. We don’t know the father knew Hawkins had the gun. If he did know, he already committed a felony by allowing a felon possession of his firearm, so again, I fail to see how this would help. You’d almost think they were using a tragedy to push a political agenda that pre-existed.

In 1994 former Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey took on the National Rifle Association, defending his vote to ban assault weapons. In a political ad back then Kerrey said, “During the War in Vietnam, people hunted me. They needed a good weapon like this AK-47, but you don’t need one to hunt birds.”

He’s right about this. Birds are hunted with shotguns, not rifles. Duh. Of course, deer can be hunted with rifles.

The ban ended in 2004, and since that time there have been 118 similar shootings. 88 innocent people have been wounded, 111 murdered.

The gun the killer use wasn’t covered by the federal ban, or under several of the state bans, so I don’t see how that’s relevant.

Finally, since the federal ban on assault weapons ended seven states have enacted thier own bans. But according to Ashford, who sees absolutely no need for an AK-47, trying to ban them in Nebraska even after the Westroads massacre, is a political fight he can’t win.

No states have enacted assault weapons ban since the federal ban expired. Is a little research too much to ask for? All those states had bans that either were in effect before the federal ban, or were passed shortly after the federal ban.

The reporter has an e-mail address at the bottom. Someone might want to try to educate him on what he got wrong.

UPDATE: Mad Rocket Scientist asks whether this reporter drives a lot more car than he might ‘need’ 

It’s good to see things haven’t changed much in Delaware County since I left. The Delco Times is still a rag, and spewing nonsense:

Cho was once pronounced an imminent danger to himself at a psychiatric hospital. Virginia Tech professors pleaded with him to get counseling, especially after he was evicted from one English class for the violent nature of his writing.

Seegrist had been hospitalized 12 times for schizophrenia in the 10 years before she committed the mall murders and was known to local law enforcement authorities for her violent behavior.

And yet, both shooters were easily able to purchase assault weapons, in part, because there was no waiting period for background checks and because the federal assault weapons ban was no longer in effect.

I haven’t heard the name Sylvia Seegrist for a while, but she was prohibited by federal law from purchasing a firearm. Cho waited to get two handguns because of Virginia’s one-gun-a-month law, and neither of his firearms were assault weapons. Sylvia Seegrist’s firearm?

The ban had not yet been enacted when, for $104 at Best Products in Marple, Seegrist purchased the Ruger .22-caliber semi-automatic rifle she used to mow down her victims at Springfield Mall. If the 1994 federal assault weapons ban had not been allowed by Congress to expire in 2004, the Virginia Tech tragedy, the largest shooting rampage in modern U.S. history, may have been averted.

A 10/22 is now an assault rifle? At least they are being clear: any gun they don’t like is one in their view.  Neither of Cho’s gun were covered by the ban, and to say that he would have not carried out his little rampage if he couldn’t get a hold of fifteen round magazines is laughable.

Read the whole sad thing. More ignorance from journalists who can’t be bothered to do research.

Check out this editorial in the Atlanta Journal-Constipation. That could have been written by the Brady Campaign.

Not surprisingly, Northern states are getting tired of watching their residents gunned down by weapons imported from the South. That’s why New York City sued 27 gun shops, including some in Georgia, whose weapons showed up in crimes 800 miles away. Last year, four Georgia shops and 11 in other states settled the case and agreed to court-appointed monitoring of their sale practices.

Of course, New York’s largest source of guns is… New York itself!

Among the allegations in the lawsuits: Adventure Outdoors of Smyrna was the source of at least 21 handguns recovered at New York crime scenes between 1994 and 2001. The suits also contend that at least 126 weapons first sold by the Gun Store in Doraville were recovered in New York crime investigations between 1996 and 2000.

Wait wait, I can change a few things here to make this work better

Among the allegation in the lawsuits: Adventure Motors of Smyrna was the source of at least 21 vehicles wrecked in drunk driving accidents in New York between 1994 and 2001. The suits also contend that at least 126 bottles of Jim Beam sold by the Booze Barn in Doraville were recovered from drunk drivers between 1996 and 2000.

So. Ms. Downey, do you believe we should sue Jim Beam and Adventure motors? Wouldn’t that be patently ridiculous? Why is it good to hold gun shop owners responsible for criminal action when they are not breaking the law? Oh, right, because you have no idea what you’re talking about.