new anti reporting approach

[57West]

I heard a quick news report on NECN last night about the teenage girl who shot her classmate over some boy trouble. "The gun used in the shooting was registered to a properly licensed gun owener who had reported it stolen" the emphasis was on the first part of the statement and the last most important part was said as a quiet after thought. Has enyone else noticed this as a new trend? It was obviously (in my opinion) trying to imply some sense of fault on the part of the gun owner as having done something wrong by having some lowlife break into his car or home and steal his property.

 

[whacko]

Its simply the anti way of countering the law abiding gun owners argument that "the vast majority of crime is committed with illegally owned guns". Which of course was the case in that story but the have found a way to spin it with comments that still pin the crime back to a law abiding gun owner.

The real deal on that story is the gun was ****ing stolen.......but the anti media will still pin it on your average gun owner.

 

[Stryker]

When I read that statement is sounds like "even registered gun owners can't keep their firearms properly stored and are part of the problem"

NECN is pretty left-leaning I believe so no doubt is it part of an agenda to throw stones at gun owners

 

[strangenh]

I'm guessing this is about the murder involving the 14-year-olds. MrsStrangeNH said exactly what you did - they were emphasizing the "legal" gun rather than the fact it had been stolen (and reported stolen to boot) and making it sound like the owner was at fault for letting it get loose to wreak havoc upon the community. it's definitely to spin the story. More putting the animus in objects crap, rather than on the fact there's a criminal element that steals and markets stolen firearms to 14-year-olds.

 

[willbdavis]

Yup. I have heard variations of this personally from libtards with whom I have to interact due to social obligations. This is part of their drive for "common sense" gun laws, like a federally mandated storage requirement, or storing your guns at a gun range (MA), or not "letting" you have them in the first place.

 

[whacko]

Yup. I have heard variations of this personally from libtards with whom I have to interact due to social obligations. This is part of their drive for "common sense" gun laws, like a federally mandated storage requirement, or storing your guns at a gun range (MA), or not "letting" you have them in the first place.

I hear ya......I REALLY get heated when I hear the crap the anti starts spewing about a gun owner being forced to comply with additional storage laws........I have a front door........why is that not enough?

 

[BigTimber]

This is how it is with all "news" story's. Couch it to fit the current libtard narrative. Media bias 101. A dem poll gets in trouble you find out what party he's in 6 paragraphs later. A conservative and it's REPUBLICAN so and so the REPUBLICAN from any town bla bla bla.

 

[DispositionMatrix]

Its simply the anti way of countering the law abiding gun owners argument that "the vast majority of crime is committed with illegally owned guns". Which of course was the case in that story but the have found a way to spin it with comments that still pin the crime back to a law abiding gun owner.

The real deal on that story is the gun was ****ing stolen.......but the anti media will still pin it on your average gun owner.

A better term is _possessed_. It is a logical impossibility for a gun to be "illegally owned" since someone who stole it does not own it. It can, however, be illegally possessed. One can infer a legally-possessed gun is possessed by its owner or at least that the gun's possession is sanctioned by the true owner. I would consider a deliberately obfuscatory phrase like "illegally owned gun" to be gun restrictionist language of the type I would not use outside of quotes.

I think we are all in accord about media's angle: guns Я bad and so Я gun owners.

 

[57West]

Yes to all the replys and thanks for the discussion. It is definatly implying that this never would have happened if joe average gun owner wasnt allowed to have guns in the first place. The reporting just bothered me more than usual.

 

[MisterHappy]

Frame the discussion.

When you pick the time and place for battle, and the allowed weapons, you are well along the Sun Tzu path to victory.