close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Evil Assault Weapons the next proof of guilt?

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by glock39, Feb 8, 2013.


  1. glock39

    glock39
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    390
    46
    Location:
    Tyler, TX
    The Martin/Zimmerman case was, as nearly as I can tell, a straightforward case of self-defense. The local police didn't even bother to arrest the citizen. Based solely on the race of the teen, somebody in the media called the shooting racist (before even bothering to find out the other party was Hispanic, not White). The President played the Race Card. Mainstream so-called journalists doctored the 911 call to make it sound racist when it clearly wasn't. Photos were cherry picked to make the teen look like an innocent 12 year old, and the shooter falsely appear to be uninjured. The story of the day was that the US was a racist country and mere facts were not allowed to interfere with advancing that agenda.

    These exact same media and political forces are now waging an all out war on assault weapons, and they aren't likely to be slowed down by any facts this time, either.

    Has the media already done this? I remember that when the Sandy Hook massacre was first reported, it was clearly stated that the shooter used two handguns and a long gun was recovered from the trunk of his car afterwards. Once the anti-gun crowd jumped in, that story changed to all the children were shot with an AR15 and the shooter only used a pistol to commit suicide. Some reporter slipped up and asked the local coroner what weapon was used? The coroner replied something to the effect of "Well, I've seen rifle wounds before and it certainly looked like a rifle wound." Is that how this guy testifies in court? It looked like a rifle wound? There should have been plenty of recovered bullets and spent shell casings that would leave absolutely no doubt as to what weapon or weapons were used. Was an AR15 even used at Sandy Hook at all?

    It currently appears taht the proposed Gun Control legislation probably won't get passed by Congress. But if the most clear cut case of a self-defense shooting is done with an AR15 while this debate is going on (which may be for the rest of Obama's term), does anyone doubt that it will be labeled as a wild case of vigilantism that proves why all these evil Assault Weapons must be banned? Would anybody reading this want to be the next George Zimmerman?
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. JBnTX

    JBnTX
    Expand Collapse
    Texas

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    19,575
    3,630
    Location:
    Texas
    Even without an AWB, all gun owners are going to be demonized by the non-shooting public. AR-15 owners will be considered the worst of the bunch.

    Insurance companies will charge more for gun owners.
    Hospitals will charge more to treat gun owners.
    Landlords will refuse to rent to gun owners.
    Colleges will refuse to admit gun owners.
    Banks won't make loans to gun owners.
    Churches will shun members who own guns.
    People you've just met will ask, "You don't own a gun, do you"?
    Kids will be ask if daddy has guns at home.
    Cops will drive by your house a little more often.
    Pets will run away from owners who have guns.

    Get ready because gun owners are about to become the lepers of society.
     

  3. glock39

    glock39
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    390
    46
    Location:
    Tyler, TX
    Well, I'm not quite as pessimistic. The truth usually comes out eventually.

    I keep hoping that some news organization will press for a detailed police report of what happened at Sandy Hook. If a rifle wasn't used there, then the anti-gunners won't look good after trying to use that as an excuse to ban rifles.
     
  4. sbhaven

    sbhaven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    4,779
    7
    Location:
    Constitution State
    Oh for the love of god not this again. :upeyes: Look the Connecticut State Police, who are leading the investigation, have said from the very first news conference that two handguns and a long gun were recovered from inside the school, that a shotgun was recovered from the car. The speculation on the weapons that are being spread on the internet has resulted in the CSP issuing a memo to reiterate what they've been saying all along.

    The MSM got a LOT of their reporting wrong that day as the events were transpiring. They first reported that Adam Lanza's brother was the murderer, then his father was dead, or was living in NJ. That Nancy Lanza worked at the school. An NBC reporter initially said four handguns were used, then that same day the same reporter said they could not confirm that information. Now people are relying on that erroneous initial MSM reporting to support their speculation of what happened that day because they don't believe the Connecticut State Police have reported.
    :faint:
     
    #4 sbhaven, Feb 9, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
  5. glock39

    glock39
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    390
    46
    Location:
    Tyler, TX
    Thanks for the correction. I withdraw my question. But after watching the media try to lynch George Zimmerman, personally hearing the original news report that only handguns were used and then hearing the mealy mouthed coroner giving an inconclusive answer what should been a totally straightforward question, I don't apologize for being skeptical. It sounds like the reporting was simply incompetence, but I don't rule out malice to advance their agenda where most of the mainstream media is concerned.
     
    #5 glock39, Feb 9, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
  6. sbhaven

    sbhaven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    4,779
    7
    Location:
    Constitution State
    With respect to the corner. One should keep in mind that he is human and was dealing with 26 victims (20 of them children) at once. And at Sandy Hook was doing his second press conference in his 30 years. Then he is faced with this...
    [​IMG]
    Its not surprising he made statements that are not concrete, that some may find "mealy mouthed". :upeyes:

    One can view some of the corner's initial press statements at this link. He clearly states that all wounds were from the "long rifle".

    Some will always be skeptical. Will never believe the official statements. Some will look for (and in some cases cling to) any news report they can find, which may be erroneous, from that day to fit their view of what transpired.

    With respect to the MSM. The talking heads, and reporters are human, they (knowingly or unknowingly) have an agenda that often seeps through into their stories. Many are Progressives, run only in Progressive circles, and most of their friends are Progressives. Because they are human and in a rush to be the first to report "something new" in the 24/7 news cycle they often get the initial reporting of an event such as Sandy Hook or The Trayvon Martin shooting wrong. Some will correct their mistakes, others will not. Right now the media is once again pimping "gun control" to further the Progressive agenda. They will try to hype up any shooting they can. We saw that with the Texas college shooting a few weeks ago that was hyped then ignored once it turned out to be a dispute between two individuals. They routinely ignore the weekly shootings in Chicago because it doesn't fit their agenda to hype up black on black, or gang, shootings.
     
    #6 sbhaven, Feb 9, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
  7. glock39

    glock39
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    390
    46
    Location:
    Tyler, TX
    My apologies to the local coroner, I can see where that would be overwhelming.

    I guess I'm getting jaded. So much of what is in the mainstream news, especially regarding guns, is, shall we say, "biased." Dealing with propaganda, one is often forced to try to draw inferences as much by what is not said as by what is reported. As you mentioned, any facts that don't support their agenda are routinely ignored. This leads to assuming that questions that are unanswered must be things that are being covered up. Given that a lot of things are not objectively reported, it's sometimes tricky to tell when the truth is being told...