Gun Nuts Media

The media’s coverage of that crazy kid who was wandering around St. John’s with a .50 cal muzzleloader, and their coverage of the deputy losing his shit and shooting up those people.

In the St. John’s story, you have repeated references to “.50 caliber rifle”, and one outlet that correctly identifies the rifle as a bp muzzleloader; you even had (predictably) some people wondering how you could buy such and eeeeeeeeeevil gun without a background check.

Meanwhile, in the Wisconsin story, the rifle is never referred to as an assault weapon, or a machine gun, but rather with the politically neutral term of “police rifle”.

Draw your own conclusions from that.

6-4.

See you in Boston.

So, when if a civilian attacks people with a semi-automatic handgun or rifle, the media calls it an assault rifle, but if a sheriff’s deputy attacks and kills six people with his issue AR-15, it’s a “police-style rifle“. And just in case CNN edits the article, here’s a screencap.

Full size photo here.

Like I said, if this had been you or I with a semi-auto rifle, there would be PSH from hell to breakfast about “assault weapons” and “machine guns” in the hands of civilians. Double standard?

Update: Uncle has the picture from CNN’s front page, when they still had it up.  See it all here.

It’s funny, but if I were to write a piece of fiction about how I was going around using my legally owned firearms to vandalize the property of anti-gun advocates, you could be pretty sure that someone would call me out on it in a great big hurry.

But if they do it, it’s okay because “it’s satire“.

Smells like crap to me.

I’m compiling the match results, I’ll have them up tomorrow.  Good shooting, everyone.

9-1 baby, on top of a gem by Shilling.  I love it.  I eagerly await the Yankees’ collapse, so that we can beat Cleveland like a drum.

CHAMPIONSHIP

Remember the girl from this post? Yeah, the girl who was suing Mickey D’s for 200 million dollars because she wasn’t smart enough to say “no” when someone claiming to be a police officer TOLD HER OVER THE PHONE to strip, that’s the girl.

The jury in her case awarded her $6.1 Million.

I…just don’t know what to say about that. I’m having of those moments where I can’t honestly believe what I’m reading, and yet at the same time am completely unsurprised.

I guess the most accurate emotion I’m experiencing here would be depression – depression that we live in a time where ignorance and a lack of common sense is enough to make you rich.

When I was thinking about this post, I had a comment sort of germinating about how could a “jury of her peers” come to this decision, until I had an epiphany. My revelation was that a jury of this woman’s peers would all be idiots as well, which then makes perfect sense.

Update: Seems Uncle agrees.

Now, if you want a hot-button issue, bring up using your CCW to carry at your place of employment.  I have known some pretty staunch “pro-gun” people who draw the line at carrying at work; and I know some equally staunch pro-gunners that insist that carrying at work is a good thing.

I don’t carry at work, although I could.  Our dress code is pretty relaxed, to the point where if I wanted to conceal my Taurus .45, it wouldn’t be a problem.  Despite that, I don’t.  I worry about that one mistake – if someone saw my gun, if something happened and it was revealed that I was armed, it would most certainly cost me my job.  So, I don’t carry at work.

I don’t leave it in the car, either – the thought of my car getting stolen out of the lot and inadvertently arming some scumbag is something that I can’t really deal with.  So, I don’t carry at work.  Which means I don’t carry on my drive to or from work, and I’m not carrying in the event that I have to run some errands on my way home.

My problem with places that prohibit employees who have the proper licenses from carrying at work is that sometimes people try to kill you where you work.  Who hasn’t seen a coworker get fired and leave angry, then wonder in the back of your mind if they’re going to come back and try to “get revenge”?

I dislike not being able to carry where I work, and I don’t like leaving a gun in my car, either.  All around, it’s a bad situation for lawful gun owners.

What are you thoughts on office/work carry?

Or I’m hallucinating – another self-professed liberal admitting that gun control doesn’t work, and that the police can’t protect you all the time.

When Florida liberalized permits for concealed weapons in the 1980s, critics predicted a Wild West bloodbath. It never happened.  Responsible gun owners don’t use guns irresponsibly. Go figure.  Until the cops get better at enforcing gun control on those who shouldn’t have guns, a better alternative for the rest of us is gun education, gun classes and secure gun storage.

Pretty much, yeah.  I mean, this is a great article.  As an aside, is there a full moon or something?  This is the third article in two days where I’ve found a self-described liberal admitting that the either the 2nd Amendment does secure an individual right, or that gun control just doesn’t work.

Needless to say, I think it’s wonderful.  I have never been able to figure out how someone who believed that freedom of speech extends to computers and the internet could not believe that the right to keep and bear arms extend to semi-automatic rifles and handguns.