Gunwars

P

PineTar

Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
616
Likes
188
Feedback: 8 / 0 / 0
I happened to catch this site on a non-gun forum, poked around, and it looks interesting.

http://gunwars.news21.com/blog/

I think a few of you will have a lot to say regarding this question [wink]. Make sure to "view all" questions as they want to get into background checks and gun show purchases.

The "what we're reading" section seems to have the anti slant along with a couple of the questions (or maybe I'm just sensitive), but the overall project could be promising if we participate.
 
Provide your First and last name, email, answer a few questions. "(Your comments may be edited for length or clarity.) *"---(or to suit our agenda)... no thanks. [rolleyes]
White Feather
 
gunwars.news21.com has lots more than the /blog section now.

Perhaps this is old, but it's overview is dated Saturday. I just read over it. They assembled a lot of information. The presentation is less biased than usual for journalism students.

The main bias I see is in their articles and statistics, they forgot to mention anything about lawful use of firearms for self defense. They talk a lot about crime and victims of violence, but they ignored Klek et al. That aside, I think it's a much more valuable contribution to the discussion than I expected. Those of us interested in politics of guns will probably want to be aware of this site.
 
Meh. The problem with gun restrictionists masquerading as objective reporters is their language gives them away. The site could be good for monitoring how each side stacks up against the other, though.
 
DispositionMatrix said:
Meh. The problem with gun restrictionists masquerading as objective reporters is their language gives them away. The site could be good for monitoring how each side stacks up against the other, though.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I think it's worth monitoring, if only to understand the opposition when they do a better-than-usual job of looking objective.

As a very long shot, I e-mailed a professor on their leadership team. I complimented them on their work, and pointed out that they forgot to include an important facet of the violence story. They talked about armed criminals and unarmed victims, but they never talked about armed victims. You can't say the story is balanced if you only talk about violence perpetrated with guns, and you ignore violence met/thwarted/resisted with guns.

I figure Gary Kleck is a professor. If there's one out there who's objective, maybe there are two? Like I said, it's a very long shot, but I took it. If he responds, I'll update this thread. After I recover from falling out of my chair.
 
Back
Top Bottom