GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2013/01/16/of-guns-the-media/trackback/

  1. One thing I’m very curious about is the media’s complete absence of focusing at all on Lanza’s motive. I’ve only found one article that even tries to touch on the relationship between Lanza’s mother and the kids and adults he deliberately targeted. From Fox, “Two law enforcement sources said they believed Nancy Lanza had been volunteering with kindergartners at the school. Most of Lanza’s victims were first graders sources believe Nancy Lanza may have worked with last year.”

    We also know that he deliberately targeted people like the principal and the school psychologist.

    A month later, and still none of this is relevant? This wasn’t a random shooting and I think even if the mother didn’t have the guns there is a strong possibility he would have found other ways to deliberately hurt these specific individuals and children since they seemed to be significant to his mother and to her life and work.

    But why would the media care about the true motive, right?

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/18/fear-being-committed-may-have-caused-connecticut-madman-to-snap/#ixzz2I81AEpaY

    Comment by Tim in MT — January 16, 2013 @ 4:18 am - January 16, 2013

  2. I am not sure they know the motive.

    I do think the media and anti gun people are quick to seize on guns as the problem rather than the person using them.

    What really seems to have gone over the heads of the media and anti gun folks is that Lanza didn’t obtain his guns legally (he stole them). Anyone really believe gun control controls the criminals is plain nuts. Gun control imposes on those who obey the law anyway.

    Comment by Just Me — January 16, 2013 @ 7:25 am - January 16, 2013

  3. Remember when Republicans tried to get some honest answers from the Administration about Benghazi, and the Democrats and the press all screamed, “How dare you exploit this tragedy for political purposes! Have you no shame?”

    And now, we have Obama shamelessly exploiting a tragedy for political purposes, and those same people cheer and applaud.

    Comment by V the K — January 16, 2013 @ 7:49 am - January 16, 2013

  4. First time commenter here, longish time reader of your site.

    By nature of what they have made themselves a criminal will not obey the law….the law…the law….clearly the answer is more laws that make it super duper illegal yes?

    More than a wee bit worried about what he will say today.

    Comment by Joshua — January 16, 2013 @ 9:08 am - January 16, 2013

  5. It’s not the Ethics, V, it’s the Message.

    The Libs will use Any Means to achieve their ends.

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 16, 2013 @ 9:20 am - January 16, 2013

  6. Joshua, consider the case of NBC’s David Gregory. He had possession of “a 30-round magazine” in violation of DC’s zero tolerance firearms laws. The mere possession of such a device is something people are routinely prosecuted for in the fascist enclave that is our National Capital.

    But David Gregory was not prosecuted because 1. He is a big media liberal and 2. His wife is good friends with the DC prosecutor.

    The law in the USA is no longer the thing before which we are all equal; it is now a tool to keep the elites in power and keep the citizenry down.

    This is one reason some of us are ready to see the whole facade burn.

    Comment by V the K — January 16, 2013 @ 10:30 am - January 16, 2013

  7. “How much different our news would be if our journalists associated more often with small businessmen and women or churchgoing Christians,”

    or if there were w viable conservative or impartial media to counter the liberal control of the national dialogue. Fox News, for all of its blessings or sins, cannot do it alone. It would be most beneficial for conservative billionaires to look toward establishing a conservative media presence rather than simply contribute to winning elections. Politics is culture and elections reflect that cultural dialogue; if nothing else, the 2012 election has taught us that.

    Comment by T — January 16, 2013 @ 11:57 am - January 16, 2013

  8. Notice how Obama has no time spend on fiscal responsibility or entitlement reform, but plenty of time to figure out ways to take away Second Amendment rights.

    Comment by V the K — January 16, 2013 @ 12:13 pm - January 16, 2013

  9. Yup, the David Gregory incident, if actually reported, should put all this talk of more gun control to rest. It would show how Obama and the Dems are monstrous hypocrites.

    If the Leftists can’t be assed to enforce the laws we have on the books now, and this incident with Gregory is a slam-dunk, then how dare they ask for more laws?

    Except that it isn’t about making anyone aside from the ruling Elite (like the wannabe Barack the First) safe. It’s all about Power.

    Thanks for posting!

    Comment by Acethepug — January 16, 2013 @ 12:38 pm - January 16, 2013

  10. What amazes me is how the radical left wants the U.S. to ratify the U.N´s Small Arms Treaty, (read, gun grabbing). Yet , according to their own statistics by the UN Office on Drug and Crime, show that the U.S. is 106th on the list of deaths by firearms, with 4.8 PER 100,000. Honduras is first with 91.6 PER 100,000 and El Salvador (where I am living) is 69.2 per 100,000, and Venezuela with absolute gun control is 45.1 per 100,000. Also, in spite of the occasional massacre by lunatics here in the U.S., FBI stats show that in states that permit concealed and carry violent crime statistic are very low and I´ll bet that supported by having the death penalty as punishment also contributes.

    Todays progressives knowledge of history goes back no further than 1932, with the election of FDR. It is either out of ignorance or outright rejection of it. They have no sense of how our Founding Fathers thought as they drafted the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. Thomas Jefferson wrote:
    Laws that prohibit the bearing of firearms disarms only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make thing worse for the assaulted and better for the agressors; they serve only to encourage rather than prevent homicides. for an unarmed man can be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

    As a member of the NRA, I worry about elected official who carry an ¨A¨ rating yet get squishy and compromise to placate the gun grabbers. Give them an inch and they´ll take a yard. I think the the National Association for Gun Rights is the better watchdog group for our Second Amendment Rights. I hope that, like California, there are states with atchdog groups like tha California Rifle and Pistol Association.

    Comment by Roberto — January 16, 2013 @ 1:08 pm - January 16, 2013

  11. Because conservative media has not been talking about guns nonstop since Sandy Hook… Oh, wait.

    While I was doing my route on Friday, every talk program was centered on guns – Rush, Hannity, Rusty Humphries, local show by Ray Appleton, Chris Daniel, Inga Barks, and a new show by Bill Manders.

    I wonder. Where has all this concern been as the 4th amendment has been gutted in the name of security?

    Comment by Sonicfrog — January 16, 2013 @ 2:03 pm - January 16, 2013

  12. Governor Rick Perry responds to Obama’s 2nd Amendment attacks.

    The piling on by the political left, and their cohorts in the media, to use the massacre of little children to advance a pre-existing political agenda that would not have saved those children, disgusts me, personally. The second amendment to the Constitution is a basic right of free people and cannot be nor will it be abridged by the executive power of this or any other president.”

    Comment by V the K — January 16, 2013 @ 2:36 pm - January 16, 2013

  13. When I heard Senator Feinstein announce that she was submitting a bill with a whole package of anti-Second Amendment Rights provisions such as background checks, fingerprinting, national registry, etc. She justified her pending legislation quoting statistics (with outrage), like , 6,400 deaths last year by fire arms. In a letter that I wrote to her expressing my opposition to the bill that she wants to see become law, I told her that I thought she was still traumatized by the assassination of Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk. Also, I expressed my concern for those 6,400 victims but if she is going to use statistics she should compare fire arms deaths with other causes of deaths. I reminded her that at least 100 persons per day as a result of automobiles, whether in crashes or as killing a pedestrian. That annual number, over the last ten years, has fluctuated from 37,000 to 45,000. Where is her out rage on this? I pointed out, for information, that automobiles are REGISTERED, and the drivers are usually LICENSED. I have doubts that she, or anybody, can claim possessing an autombile and having a drivers license is a natural right as opposed to being a privilege.

    Comment by Roberto — January 16, 2013 @ 3:09 pm - January 16, 2013

  14. There are two background checks and two only that I think should be required for firearm owners – a history of violent crime, and a history of involuntary admission or treatment for suicidal depression or psychosis.

    I am no longer sure whether the unwillingness of the anti-gunners to delve deeper into Lanza’s motivations is simple unwillingness or straight-out inability. I think their minds really are that closed and limited.

    Comment by perturbed — January 16, 2013 @ 4:48 pm - January 16, 2013

  15. No amount of gun control will 100% stop crime and the 2nd amendment is pretty clear that that the US people have a right to hold guns.

    That being said, I really would like to see the type of weapons used in Sandy Hook gone.

    Comment by mike — January 16, 2013 @ 9:44 pm - January 16, 2013

  16. I don’t like guns, and things that I don’t like should be made illegal by the Government.

    Comment by Average Democrat — January 16, 2013 @ 10:08 pm - January 16, 2013

  17. I really would like to see the type of weapons used in Sandy Hook gone.

    On the other hand, I prefer to have a defensive weapon which can match or outgun what the bad guy breaking in has.

    I am not too concerned about being attacked by deer, a bear or a flock of gold-finches high on thistle seed. But if three ghetto guys all weaponed up with Glocks come for my goodies, I stand to be prepared.

    Comment by heliotrope — January 17, 2013 @ 1:48 pm - January 17, 2013

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.130 Powered by Wordpress