Media Bias

Today's tidbit comes to us once again from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in the form of an opinion piece from Maureen Downey, for the editorial board. Let's see if we can guess which side of the debate the AJC favors from the title:

OUR OPINIONS: Shoot down gun bill

High violent crime rates kill lobby's argument that carrying a weapon will boost public safety

Okay, got that out of the way right off, huh? Maureen is a pretty skilled writer and carries the Brady line like a pro. However, after watching these folks for a while, it's still the same old rhetoric and lack of reasoned argumentation as always. She begins:

The gun lobby contends that Georgia will be a safer place if Gov. Sonny Perdue signs House Bill 89, which allows those with permits to carry concealed weapons on MARTA trains, in state parks and in restaurants that serve alcohol.

But, of course, those lobbyists offer no facts to support their position, only the bumper-sticker argument that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

Notice that when the anti speaks of those who are pro-rights, it is "the lobby." Actually, nothing coalesces grassroots organizations as quickly and firmly as a threat to firearm rights. By definition, many of those groups do form "lobbies." Somehow, unfortunately, the term "lobby" became a dirty word in mainstream politics but by definition it means: a group of people who try actively to influence legislation. Nothing dirty about it. It's how a democratic republic works. The largest lobby in D.C. is the AARP! Are the retired folks being sneaky and wicked or just looking out for their own interest?

Also notice the slick ommission of any details about how Georgia HB 89 passed the House and Senate by an almost 2-1 margin in favor. Then , of course, there's always the mixing of guns and alcohol that sends the Suzy Soccermoms screaming from the room with no mention that consumption is prohibited while carrying by the bill.

So after an introduction laying down a foundation of false hysteria she throws out an absolute fallacy: the pro-rights crowd has nothing but bumper stickers. Actually I kind of like my VCDL bumber stickers. Got one on every car: GUNS SAVE LIVES - 2.5 million defensive uses each year. That, Maureen, is a FACT, not just a bumper sticker. It comes from a study by Gary Kleck, Ph.D., a professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University in Tallahassee.  

Maureen conitnues:

Fortunately, that statement has been put to a real-life test. New York has enacted some of the strictest guncontrol laws in the country. The state requires people to obtain a license for handgun purchases. Unlike Georgia, New York is a "may issue" state, which means an applicant must show good cause or justifiable need for a concealed weapons permit and that law enforcement can refuse to issue such a permit. Here in Georgia, the probate court must issue the permit if the applicant meets statutory requirements.

New York City goes even further than state law by limiting individual gun purchases to one every 90 days, maintaining a gun offender registry and requiring firearms dealers to review inventories and file reports with police twice a year

 You have a problem with Georgia taking a position that a citizen is protected from prejudice and bias by public officials if found to be competent and law abiding? Why, that's just downright unAmerican of you, Maureen!

Interestingly, the Center for Disease Control, which has never been an ally to the pro-rights crowd, stated in a Task Force study: "In conclusion, the application of imperfect methods to imperfect data has commonly resulted in inconsistent and otherwise insufficient evidence with which to determine the effectiveness of firearms laws in modifying violent outcomes." 

Therefore, I must ask, if the CDC could find no evidence of any of the literally thousands of firearms laws having any measurable effects on crime, how do you, Maureen, come to this grand conclusion? Can you cite a peer reviewed study backing your assertion? Or is it just an inspiration for a bumper sticker?

Let's continue:

According to the Georgia gun lobby, law-abiding New Yorkers should now be at the mercy of well-armed criminals and violent crime should be rampant. Broadway and Park Avenue should be overrun with thugs and miscreants packing heat. After all, New York City has dramatically impeded the ability of law-abiding citizens to own firearms, which, according to the gun lobby calculus, should add up to more criminals with guns and more bodies of innocent people strewn in the streets.

Dudes! Did you guys really say that? I have GOT to see that quote in print before I'll buy into that one! Methinks Maureen is starting to get a little dishonest in her asertions.

But in fact, New York now has the lowest crime rate among the 10 largest U.S. cities. Since 1991, violent crime has fallen 75 percent. Last year, gun homicides fell 22 percent; shootings dropped 16 percent. The city has 5,000 fewer police officers than in 2000.

In other words, less access to guns has not translated to more gun crime. Fewer guns has meant less gun violence, not more.

And every time I wash my car it rains...

Violent crime has dropped nationwide in the past decade and a half. If Maureens assertion were true, then the same experiment should yield the same results in D.C., Baltimore, Chicago, etc.

And really, Maureen, do you think these stats all add up to the person who IS at the mercy of a violent criminal because their government would not allow them the best technology to defend themself? The laws of this nation pertaining to civil liberties should always be geared towards the individual. Until all those numbers you cite show 100% drops, you really don't have a case. And even if they DO drop to 100%, I'm still keeping my gun. Ask the folks down in New Orleans how fast things can change for the worst.

New York's progress is even more impressive when you consider the impact of guns brought in from beyond its borders. City police have found that 87 percent of guns recovered in crimes there —- including weapons used in 60 percent of the murders —- came to the Big Apple from other states with lax gun laws, including Georgia.

New York is not the only reproof to the gun lobby fantasy that common-sense gun laws lead to more blood in the streets. The United States has more guns in private hands than any other developed nation, so if more guns make us safer, the United States should have a very low rate of violent crime.

How were they obtained to be brought into the Big Apple? Were they in the possession of the original owner? Were the purchases legal? You have already stated that New York's draconian firearm laws severely impede the law abiding consumer from obtaing a legally purchased firearm. Now you would group those who wish to purchase a gun legally with those who don't care about the law in the first place?

Really, if the whole point of your editorial is to prove that HB 89 is going to be a boon for criminals, you should have left that last statement out. Criminals already pack when they ride the public transportation systems, drink in bars, and cruise the town. And they SURE aren't applying for GFL's! They don't qualify! They're criminals, Maureen, you ninny!

The opposite is true. In 2004, 11,344 Americans were murdered with a firearm. Compare that to Australia, where guns were used to murder 56 people, and to England and Wales, where guns were used in the murders of 73 people.

The gun lobby explains those numbers by claiming that people in Australia and England are inherently more peaceable than Americans. But is the gun lobby now going to tell us that New Yorkers are more gentle and law-abiding than Georgians?

Hmm, 11,344 murders compared to 2.5 million defensive uses. Hang on, let me do the math...

Oh, and you may want to check the latest trends in your "peacable" little gun-control Utopias across the seas there, Maureen.

In considering whether to veto HB 89, Perdue ought to rely on the facts, as have the governors of Arizona and Virginia, both of whom vetoed similar legislation in recent years. In April, the Tennessee Legislature killed its version of HB 89, with even gun advocates in the Legislature warning that guns and booze are a lethal mix.

Perdue should look to his colleagues for inspiration and support, not to a gun lobby that offers fear-mongering rather than facts.

Yes, Governor Perdue should look at the facts. I think I speak for freedom loving people everywhere when I say that I agree. As for the Governor of Virginia, he has purchased a plot in the political graveyard like every other politician that pandered to the LOBBYIST on the anti-rights side.

It's not our backyard but we, too, would urge Governor Perdue to side with his colleagues - the 146 men and women of the Georgian Legislature whom the fine folks of Georgia elected to represent them and who passed this piece of legislation that now sits in the Governor's in-box. Otherwise, he may want to start house hunting with Napolitano and Kaine while the market is soft. The gubrenatorial mansions will have some new folks in them next election cycle.

Hey, Maureen, you want some MORE facts? Try this link.

Bumper stickers indeed!

Most of you are probably aware that one of the media's favorite tricks is to make firearms sound as scary as possible, either to pad their agenda, add sensationalism, or both. Illinois is one of the major frontlines now in the war for rights and the media out of Chicago fueled on by Mayor Richard Daley comes up with some doozies. David Codrea picked up on one this weekend and adds a little taunt of his own:

Seen over at David's Sunday:

"Semi Fully-Automatic..." 

...expialidocious...

The article linked to is Chicago's justification for needing to arm their LEO with "high-powered assault rifles" later specified in the article as "M4 rifles." Meanwhile, the subjects, er, citizens remain as unarmed as Daley, the Chicago City Council and the the anti-rights representation at the state level can make it. For some reason, the LEO are just somehow more entitled than the average Jane and Joe. Perhaps because the elected officials in Chicago think EVERYONE on the street is a criminal?

Once again asserting that it is not the madman behind the gun or the poor implementation of existing laws, but the gun dealer and the gun that are to blame, ABC offers the world this little jewel today.

The owner of an Internet-based firearms store that sold a gun to Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho says he is now offering a discount for students who want to carry guns on campus to protect themselves. The company, TGSCOM Inc., also sold two 9mm Glock magazines to Steven Kazmierczak, who killed five people at Northern Illinois University earlier this year.

Just the facts, right? Look who they quote in the article.

First Mr. "now students and visitors can feel safe" himself:

A spokesperson for Virginia Tech said that Thompson's remarks and offer are "incredibly insensitive to the families of the victims who lost loved ones, and to the injured students still recovering from this horrendous tragedy," said Larry Hincker, the Associate Vice President for University Relations.

...but anti-rights political rallies on the anniversary of the massacre that were strongly objected to are just hunky-dorey, right, Larry?

Then everybody's favorite from the Brady Bunch - Peter (he's the middle one).

"He's arming the criminals and then telling the rest of us to buy guns so we can protect ourselves from the criminals he's armed," said Peter Hamm, communications director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

There they go calling me a criminal again! This is getting kinda personal.

And finally, D.C.'s one lone Federal Firearms Dealer licensee - Josh "gimme some" Sugarmann.

"What this shows is that to the gun industry, gun violence is at best an abstract concept and at worst a business opportunity," said Josh Sugarmann, the Executive Director of the Violence Policy Center.

"No matter how these products are used against citizens, the answer is always more guns when in fact these problems stem from the fact that there are too many guns out there already," Sugarmann told ABCNews.com.

Bad gun industry, bad! No sugarr for you!

The eeeevil Eric Thompson's reason for attempting to flood the market with his insidious wares?

"The next news story I want to be involved in is how I sold a firearm to someone who helped stop a mass murderer.  By forgoing a profit, I hope to help give law-abiding citizens the tools to prevent tragedy," he said.

How nefarious! How vile! Self-defense against a mass murderer? Next thing you know you'll want some woman to stop a rape or a man to defend his children! Then what? A de-escalation of violent crime? Is that your insipid plan, you... you... free enterprising capitalist, you? How will the VPC and the Bradys raise funds? How will the VTech administrators "feel" safe?

I'm going to go out and bang my head on the sidewalk for a while. Someone call me when it's over.

Update: Philip sounds pretty disgusted in the VA-ALERT this afternoon as well and has a few words for Larry Hincker:

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus at Virginia Tech are having a guest speaker tonight - Eric Thompson

Eric was the unfortunate dealer who LAWFULLY sold some equipment to both Cho and the Northern Illinois University shooter.

Eric feels strongly that after both of those horrible events, students need to be able to protect themselves.  To put his money where his mouth is, Eric is offering to sell guns, AT COST, to students at his Internet site.  Of course all purchases will be shipped to a dealer so that the college and university students will have to go through the normal background check to pickup their guns.

What is absolutely disgusting are comments made by Virginia Tech Spokesman, Larry Hincker.

Mr. Hincker said (and I am not making this up):

"I find it terribly offensive to learn that the gun-seller of the weapons used in the Virginia Tech campus murders would set foot on this campus."

Well, that just frosted my cake!!!

NO, MR. HINCKER - What's offensive to Virginia's gun owners is that YOU are allowed to set foot on the Virginia Tech campus!

YOU, who gloated how 'safe' Virginia Tech students and faculty FEEL now that a bill to allow students and faculty to defend themselves had been defeated in the General Assembly!

YOU, who can't get his head around freedom and even commonsense.

YOU, who bows at the altar of Political Correctness, no matter how high the body count gets!

How dare YOU talk about someone who has done NOTHING WRONG, being banned from free speech at Virginia Tech because YOU don't agree with what he has to say?

What a buffoon!

Anyhow, Eric is speaking from 7-9 PM tonight at the Whittemore Hall, Room 300.  I hope it is standing room only to refute Hincker's narrow definition of both the First and Second Amendments!

[The following link failed in the VA-ALERT. It works here. Same article from the Richmond Times Dispatch - CK]

Here is a story about it in the Virginian-Pilot

A number of blogs were commenting on this story from the Chicago Tribune:

Gun-Control Backers: Where Are You?

I've written several posts and column items recently on the issue of gun control -- the most recent one asking for ideas from both sides about compromises that gun-rights people and gun-ban people might be able to live with.

And each time it has struck me how tiny, uninspired and vague the response has been from those who favor new laws to try to keep guns out of the hand of evildoers.

While the gun-rights folks weigh in quickly and forcefully with links to studies and detailed arguments, the gun-ban folks are mostly quiet. The   suggestions seem to be mostly on the order of Police Supt. Jody Weis' call in today's paper to ban AK-47 rifles, which, as I have argued before, is beside the point, at best.

If gun-control advocates don't want to or can't join the conversation here, I'm prepared to shut it down as the futile exercise it may well be.

For those of us who have attended the anti-rights protests before, this is no real surprise. We always, outnumber them and outdebate them. It's just more intense on the internet where one can produced volumes of data to back up one's claims, and peer review refutation of the other side's arguments and studies with a mere click of a mouse.

But what's interesting is that Eric Zorn, the author of this article shows that he wasn't really interested in "ideas from both sides." He was just waiting for that one solid, irrefutable argument from the anti side that he could build his case upon. It never came. From a newspaper that boast a readership of thousands. In  a city with almost complete rights infringements.

When the anti-rights crowd holds one of their rallies, they bus people in, often from scores of miles away, to pad their numbers. They have a disproportionate number of children that they count amongst their ranks. It's all smoke and mirrors. It's all they've got. The pro-rights side gets there by personal transportation and is overwhelmingly over 18. Because it matters to us.

Say Uncle stated it well today in his post:

We’re passionate and ready. And, at the click of a button, I can send you all the Reasoned Discourse^tm you can handle.

This is why we win. Sure, it’s like whack-a-mole in that we can’t stop or we lose. But there’s no shortage of us to counter your emotion-laden, feel good nonsense. That and, outside a few locations of which Chicago is one, gun control is just not very popular.

Whack-a-mole! He cracks me up! He makes other pertinent observations and points to some of the other bloggers commenting today. Go check him out.

Yeah, Cuba, bizarre as that may sound.

Actually, not so bizarre when one thinks about it. I mean why wouldn't a country that has such obvious disdain for our nation and our principles parrot the quasi-socialists in the anti-rights biased American media on the issue of gun control? When I first read the article I thought it was from an American journalist.

Gun control advocates say the failure of lawmakers to pass tough legislation in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech massacre is a sign of the American gun lobby's power in shaping laws and public opinion.

I always have to wonder why when policy making favors pro-rights, it is the "gun lobby." When it favors the anti-rights agenda, it's "public opinion" unswayed by outside influence. Cuba envies us for our mind control ray guns evidently.

Some states, including Virginia, have tightened background check restrictions to close loopholes such as the one that allowed Cho to purchase firearms even though he been ordered to seek psychiatric treatment.

Despite the advance, Virginia issued 60 percent more gun permits in 2007 compared to 2006, stated the Washington Post.

So, let me get this straight: Legislation was enacted that was actually related to and may (or may not) have helped prevent the tragedy. That is an advance. But the issuing of 60% more [concealed hand]gun permits, which is an unrelated matter as students and employees of almost all colleges in the Commonwealth are prevented from cayrrying, is counter to that?

There's plenty more of the same old tripe in that article. Perhaps the antis will soon board homemade rafts and set out from Florida to join their comrade "citizens" in Cuba. They all seem to be on the same page.