Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Tales Told By Fools: Why The Media Can't Get Anything Right About Guns

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

The Gun Nuts
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

August 08, 2011

Tales Told By Fools: Why The Media Can't Get Anything Right About Guns

By David E. Petzal

Imagine a newspaper story on automobiles in which the writer confused camshafts and driveshafts. Or a piece on investing in which the words “stock” and “bond” were used interchangeably. Or one that referred to Marines as soldiers (which will get you a punch in the mouth from any self-respecting Jarhead). Not likely, you think. No reporter is that ignorant or that careless. Wrong. They are when they turn their attention to guns. Cartridge and bullet are used interchangeably, clip and magazine mean the same thing; submachine gun and machine gun are synonyms. And it gets worse.

When the M-16 was first issued during the Vietnam War, Americans were informed that it was deadly because its bullets tumbled through the air, creating terrible wounds when they hit. Anyone who has ever thrown a football knows what a crock this is. Apparently, news reporters do not throw footballs.

In a recent article in The New York Times, a reporter quoted a police officer as stating that a Smith & Wesson revolver went off when it was dropped. The handgun was made in the 1970s, so there is a problem: No Smith wheelgun of post-World-War-II manufacture can go off unless the trigger is pulled. Even if the revolver was cocked, it’s highly unlikely that it could fire. It sounds like the police officer told a Great Big Fib, but the reporter did not know enough about the subject (or, probably, anything about the subject) to call him on it.

In the 1990s, a newspaper Sunday supplement ran an article on gun control that used the term “ballistic footprint.” This was a new one to me so I called the magazine and asked the editor in chief what it meant. He said he had no idea but that he would check with his staff. He did, and no one else had a clue, either.

We are treated to almost-daily accounts of assault weapons that are supposedly being purchased at American gun shops and sent south of the border through an elaborate system of straw men, couriers, intermediaries, etc. But as the American Rifleman points out in its excellent article on the subject in its July issue, drug cartels are huge businesses with unlimited budgets. Why would they go to the trouble of buying two or three or a dozen guns in the U.S. when they could call their friendly arms merchant and get a pallet load of guns, still in the factory cosmoline, delivered right to their doors?

So why, when someone says “gun,” does a journalist’s common sense head for parts unknown?

First, there is a strong tendency among people not to challenge conventional wisdom. As proof of that, I offer the fact that from AD 200 until roughly 1850, western medicine was based on the teachings of a physician named Galen. Galen did not know that blood circulated, or that the heart pumped it. He blamed disease on an imbalance among four bodily humors (black bile, yellow bile, water, and phlegm), and drew his conclusions about human anatomy from dissections of monkeys and pigs, not humans. But for nearly two millennia, Galen was more revered than Oprah.

So we tend not to question, and from the unanimity of thought on the subject in the media, I believe that J-school students and cub reporters learn, very early on, that the following is the Revealed Truth:

1. Guns are inherently evil.

2. There is no reason to own a gun in 21st century America unless you hunt, and if you hunt there’s clearly something wrong with you.

3. The United States would be a better country if no one had a gun, including the police.

4. American gun owners--all 80 million of them--are homicidal knuckle-draggers and mouth breathers.

5. The majority of Americans yearn for more gun control, but cannot get it because of the National Rifle Association.

6. In its 140 years of existence, the National Rifle Association has never been right on any issue.

7. If “reasonable” gun controls make it nearly impossible for a citizen to buy a firearm, there’s nothing wrong with that. Never mind the Bill of Rights. Some rights are Clearly Wrong.

8. And, most important: If a journalist acquires “information” that aligns with Numbers 1 through 7, there’s no need to check it, because it is obviously true.

Number 8 is a b***h, and we will come back to it.

Now, let us go to our second cause, the American educational system. It does not do such a hot job of teaching math or science (or American history, or geography, or English), but it gets high marks for political correctness and non-encouragement of student skepticism if that challenges PC.

Let’s take as an example the MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow, who has degrees from Stanford and Oxford but does not seem to have mastered the concept of independent inquiry. On her broadcast of January 11 of this year, she posed a hypothetical question: If an undetectable plastic pistol were made, one with no steel, that would go through a metal detector, should people be allowed to carry it? In the course of her rant, she claimed that a) It’s possible to make such a gun and b) that during the 1980s, Glock acknowledged that it had the technology to do so.

This runs contrary to what I know, so I enquired of my gunsmith friend John Blauvelt, who is a graduate of the Glock Armorers’ School. Here’s his take:

“X-rays of Glocks always show the outline of the gun, and the cartridges, and the 50 percent of the pistol that is metal. As for building a pistol with no metal:

“No one has come up with strong-enough springs that can be made out of plastic, such as the springs to power hammers or strikers or hold the breech closed.

“Barrels still have to be made of steel. There have been experiments with ceramics to mold barrels, but while ceramics are hard and long-lasting they’re too brittle to contain the force of a cartridge.

“Making a plastic slide with enough mass to resist the breech opening of a semi-automatic pistol would require a truly massive slide. Maybe possible, but certainly not practical.

“There are unsubstantiated rumors that the CIA and KGB have guns that can get through metal detectors. The rumors state that they are manually operated, or single-shot, and are disposable. But they are just rumors.”

How about the alleged claim by Glock in the 1980s that they could make an all-plastic gun?

On May 15, 1986, testifying before the House Subcommittee on Crime, Billie Vincent, FAA Director of Civil Aviation Security, said: “Despite a relatively common impression to the contrary, there is no current non-metal firearm which is not reasonably detectable by present technology and methods in use at our airports today, nor to my knowledge is anyone on the threshold of developing such a firearm [italics added].”

So where does Ms. Maddow get her “information”? Your guess is as good as mine. I’ve e-mailed her, asking that question, but I doubt I’ll get an answer. My guess is that she heard it from someone, or read it somewhere, and it fit in with her nightmare fantasies, so she accepted it without question. She apparently didn’t learn at Stanford or Oxford that if you want to get at the truth, you don’t assume anything.

Or it could be that she’s not interested in getting at the truth.

I also called Glock, and asked if the technology did exist to build a no-steel handgun, and if the company had claimed that it could way back in the 1980s, but I never got an answer.

So why should you care about Rachel Maddow and those like her? Because people listen to them, and take them seriously. This is why it’s almost impossible for the NRA to get a fair hearing in much of the media. It’s why Mayor for Life Bloomberg gets so much mileage out of his anti-gun crusade. It’s the reason that Wayne LaPierre, when he said that the BATF had acted like jackbooted thugs, was pilloried in the press, even though he was right.

And, when the polls open, the people who listen to Rachel and take her at face value go to the polls...and vote.

Comments (116)

Top Rated
All Comments
from huntnow wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

It is a scary world out there. Much of the fear is media driven and media invented.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from TAM9492 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Excellent piece of writing.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from GregMc wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Hey Dave,

How about a link to the recent Times story you refer to?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

On the local news the other night, it was "reported" that some chucklehead had his guns stolen overnight out of his unlocked car (ignore that brilliance for this moment).The police had recovered the handguns, but the "assault rifle" was still missing. I couldn't help but wonder if they meant "AR" as in ARmalite-type rifle?

Nah, they meant Assault Rifle. Sounds more dramatic.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jason Hart wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great piece, and truly shows how low we have sunk when we listen to journalists such as Ms. Maddow and others.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

You cannot make a living as a journalist by telling the truth. It's too boring.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from RJ Arena wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The only way we can fight this madness that I know of, is to invite a non-gun person to shoot. I have done this many times, and have had successes every time. Once they understand that fear is their enemy, not the firearm, they see shooting for what it is, practical and fun!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from dalebob61 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I read this column daily. I enjoy the stuff you and PB write about and occaisionally we get pure gold. That's what today was Mr Petzal. Thanks for great insight and honest writing. I will be forwarding this link to a lot of my friends today.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from NHshtr wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Today, "journalism" means "tell people what you want them to believe". It's that simple.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

no, no, no... people only want to hear what they want to hear from the people they want to hear it from. We can't be bothered with "thinking."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

“Since 1934, only one legally owned machine gun has been used in a crime of murder, and a law enforcement officer committed that crime.”
-The History Channel, Modern Marvels, Weapons at War: The Machine Gun

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from USMC Limey wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

My brain just about explodes every time I read an anti-gunners article. I'm sick of hearing about high-capacity "Clips" (incidentally they consider the standard 15rd Magazine that my Glock 19 has as being "High Capacity"), I really wish I knew what a "cop killer bullet" was (any projectile that can tell what your profession is must be high tech).
My favorite misused term has to be "Common-Sense", doesn't it stand to reason that trying to impose regulations that have failed to achieve the desired results in every country that has adopted them is in fact non-sensical ? If I'm non mistaken, trying the same thing repeatedly and expecting the same result is in fact stupidity. Maybe they should be honest and refer to their measures as "Common Stupidity" to avoid wasting the time of the Generally Disinterested public who usually make their decision at the poll based on a candidates charm and linguistic eloquence.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mjenkins1 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I don't know (although I could take a good guess) as to what made you go on this "rant" today Mr Petzal, but I wish it would happen more often because reading this nearly made my day.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from JohnR wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I've posted this before but I'll reiterate. I was in LE when the "cop killer bullet" controversy was news. The original reports referred to the hardened brass core Nyclad bullet produced by KTW which BTW was not ever offered for civilian sale. It was produced specifically for LE officers when they had to fire at a "hardened" target such as a car body. The nefarious NBC ran a special in 1982 about those bullets because they were capable of penetrating the soft body armor worn by most police agencies. What affected us in LE the most was that back in 1982 it wasn't very well known that we were wearing soft body armor under our shirts. Most people thought of body armor as the heavy ceramic or metallic stuff police strapped on the outside of their uniforms. I'll never forget the comment that one of our officers made following the NBC special that revealed the police officers wear "soft" body armor under their shirts. He said "Great, now all the dirt bags in the country will shoot at my head!"
Also Wayne LaPierre didn't come up with the "Jack booted thugs" referral to the BATFE. He was repeating that comment originally coined by Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman. The press however was all to happy to give all the (negative) credit to Wayne.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

"Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets."

"Advice to young writers who want to get ahead without annoying delays: don’t write about Man, write about 'a' man."

"No tears in the writer, no tears in the reader. No surprise in the writer, no surprise in the reader."

"Special-interest publications should realize that if they are attracting enough advertising and readers to make a profit, the interest is not so special."

"Fiction is the truth inside the lie."

-AUTHOR UNKNOWN

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

“At first glance, it may seem odd or even perverse to suggest that statutory controls on the private ownership of firearms are irrelevant to the problem of armed crime: yet that is precisely what the evidence shows. Armed crime and violent crime generally are products of ethnic and social factors unrelated to the availability of a particular type of weapon. The number of firearms required to satisfy the crime market is minute, and these are supplied no matter what controls are instituted. Controls have had serious effect on legitimate users of firearms, but there is no case, either in the history of this country (Britain) or in the experience of other countries in which controls can be shown to have restricted the flow of weapons to criminals, or in any way reduce crime.”
-Chief Inspector Colins Greenwood, West Yorkshire Constabulary, Police Review, Britain after six months of study of firearms control systems at Cambridge University

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Do not know why LaPierre's comment concerning the ATF being Jack Booted Thugs even made the news. Many in the Reagan administration considered the ATF to be just that and in the early 80's wanted to disband the ATF and hand the duties over to the Secret Service. A better trained group. Then Waco and Ruby Ridge only confirmed to the whole world what the ATF was all about. LaPierre hit the nail on the head.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I like to have a laugh at anybody that likes to claim that their major "news" network is right and the other is wrong. What fools they must be.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from freeparking wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Not curious about factual gun information, not curious about the Gunwalker scandal, which is really disturbing.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Here's a good lie -

If we banned those 30 round Satan clips, many many lives would have been saved in Tucson.

How long do they think it takes to change magazines? Not very. Might have saved one life. Maybe, but probably not.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Muleynut30.06 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

a perfect example of this is when the media tried to take down the legendary model 700. I thought it was pretty impessive how quickly that story died due to the counter report by remington. Like everyone said media is the basis of fear and people jump right on board when guns are involved.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from mike55 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Right on Dave! Here's one to shut up the "media gestapo elite" when they come up with their buzz words to distort, inflame or sensationalize a subject like the Right to Bear Arms, to their political philosophies and leanings. I wish Sarah Palin, when being grilled by Charlie Gibson before the Presidential Election on assault weapons would have said to him, "Charlie, I would like to know exactly what an assault weapon is, so we can clarify what we're talking about? You're an intelligent man and supposedly deal in facts so you should be able to tell me and the American public right now what an assault weapon is." Would have shut him up right there because they know it's a vague term that sounds bad or dangerous, that could include a large portion of American sporting and defense arms, therefore making it easier to demonize and ban more guns in one fell swoop. If he didn't get it and kept egging her on about "assault weapons" she should have said, "Are we talking about fully automatic military machine guns which are illegal for the public to own without a special permit or are talking about semi-automatic sporting and defense arms that a large portion of the American public own?" Maybe he would get it then because their motives (the leftist media) have been exposed. The asleep American public that keeps voting in these deceivers that are trying to ban all their guns could wake up and say " maybe they're talking about my semi-auto .22, shotgun, deer rifle or pistol." Politicians that are standing up for our constitutional rights have to know how to handle the media's deceptive phrases and "buzz" words.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tony Berg wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Liberals want to outlaw all guns and add more government and restrictions to your life..... Well, I have noticed that drugs are illegal but many people still attain them. I have noticed that prohibition outlawed alcohol and turned common street thugs into deadly organized gangs. Hell, drinking and driving are illegal and how many people participate in that crime every weekend. For Gods sake, outlawing guns will not work. It will take guns out of law abiding citizens hands and put them into criminals hands. Can you imagine a country where the only people with guns would be criminals and the government....... If that doesn't scare the crap out of you I don't know what will.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tony Berg wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Good column Mr. Petzal.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

buckhunter LaPierre's comment about ATF being Jack Booted Thugs wasn't the only one.

“a jack-booted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today.”
-Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) in 1983, describing the ATF

“a jack-booted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today.”
-Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) in 1983, describing the ATF

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

MOOSED DAT ONE UP!

“I took an oath. And the thing that I find totally abhorrent and disgusting is these higher-level people took that same oath and they violate the basic principles and tenets of the Constitution and the laws and simple ethics and morality.”
-Lou Tomasello, ATF agent, to Mike Wallace, on 60 Minutes, 1993-Jan

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from dickgun wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great post, Dave,
Re: Wayne LaPierre and the comment using the words "jack booted thugs."
Many people do not know that it was the esteemed Congressman from Michigan, (DEMOCRAT) John Dingell, that first used those words in public in describing Govt employees. Wonder why THAT never shows up in public comment.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dickgun wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Clay,
I wrote my comment before I saw yours with the John Dingell reference. That's the one. Thanks for naming the source. I have it somewhere but not in memory.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from focusfront wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

It's not just guns. Actually, the media can't get anything right about anything on the traditional/ conservative side of the room. Ask them about the Tea Party, any right-to-life (anti-abortion) organization, the Christian church, marriage, etc.; you'll get that same glassy eyed stare.

Media's biggest problem is laziness. Back when I worked in the public sector as a public safety officer, I used to read newspaper reports about incidents I'd been to that were so far from accurate that sometimes I didn't know I had been there until I read the address the incident took place at. In a deadline heavy business like the news, it takes too much time to ask questions. Better to skim the surface and fill in the rest of the blanks with insights retained from your liberal arts education than to get it right and get beat by another reporter.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from focusfront wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Good post, Dave, by the way. I don't know what to do about media bias either. If you have any suggestions (other than all of us on this post joining the NRA, which I'm sure we are all smart enough to have done long ago), let's hear them. Meanwhile, keep punching out pieces like these, buddy.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

actually, they still get it wrong when it comes to men in uniform. just recently during the issue reporting on Bin Laden's death, TIME was chastised by readers for referring to SEALs as "soldiers". Of course, being from the Navy, they should be called sailors. Or should they? I'm not so sure anymore.

It's not just the liberal media. Even in shows where you'd expect them to get it right, they still get it wrong. Even "former SEAL" Richard "Mack" Machowicz sometimes interchanges "bullet" with "cartridge". And the TV series "Top Shot" commits this sin repeatedly.

I suppose these hosts (even Mack) just rely on their "scriptwriters" completely, not bothering to insert their corrections or override the "script". Or maybe I'm just giving them too much credit.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Pretty low-road comment Jim. Is that what you were going for?

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Bruce Willis (as John McClane) refers to the MP5 (nice weapon) as a "machinegun" in the original "Die Hard", when he scribes a message on a bad guy's dead body in the elevator. It really is a submachinegun, probably the best of its kind, or a machine carbine, or machine pistol, but Hollywood and most folks don't sweat the difference. If it fires full auto, they immmediately think "machinegun!".

Of course, there's the case of the "sniper rifle".

And there's always this scene in a Hollywood movie or TV show, where someone always shouts "look, he's got a gun!" whenever someone (even a good guy) pulls a gun, always causing panic in a crowd.

Regarding assault weapons, the term assault rifle was the result of Hitler's propaganda anyway. He changed MP-43/MP-44 (machine pistol or "submachinegun") to "StG-44" or "storm rifle" (which became assault rifle in common English usage) to heighten its terror impact on enemies, just like the vengeance weapons V-1 and V-2, and to indicate that a new class of weapon was born (true, to a point). The MP-44/StG-44 was indeed the first widely deployed assault rifle, but it wasn't the first.

When Fedorov invented the first true assault rifle in 1916(!), he simply named it Avtomat. Imagine if the Russians managed to manufacture that thing in large numbers? They would have mowed down the Germans during Operation Barbarossa, and Marilyn Monroe would have had to come up with a different word in "Diamonds Are A Girl's Bestfriend" (bad joke, sorry).

Hitler's propaganda campaign must have succeeded, because now, any autoloader with more than 10-round capacity, a pistol grip and bayonet lug, even though it fires semiautomatic, is considered an assault weapon.

If Miyamoto Musashi were alive, he'd tell you his sword, whether wooden or steel (he had killed people with both types) was an assault weapon. If Bruce Lee were alive, he'd tell you his nunchakus were assault weapons. Heck, every bit of Bruce was an assault weapon. But I think I'd better stop there, lest the people at CNN start a campaign banning martial arts, chopsticks and kitchen knives.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bernie wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great post, Dave! Another favorite of know-nothing journalists is to describe shot pellets as "buck shot."

I have worked with biologists, engineers, law enforcement officers, Marines, and god-knows-who else, but I never witnessed a profession as profoundly ignorant about firearms as those in the journalism field. My first job out of college was as a reporter/columnist for a midwestern newspaper. Out of 26 editorial workers, including myself, one guy was a duck hunter, one sports reporter shot a whitetail doe in Minnesota one time. And there was me. The rest were some blend of anti-hunter/anti-gunner, and knew nothing about firearms. And this was more than 35 years ago! I cannot imagine how things would be today on a big city daily. I think the answer is that most journalists come from liberal, and often urban backgrounds,where firearms are an enigma. I should also mention that in one of my columns I stated that the average journalist didn't know a shotgun from a broomstick, but usually was an ardent supporter of gun control. The new managing editor, an import from the Miami Herald, dropped my column.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from guncrazy74 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Ahh my dear friend Dave.
So nice to hear so much sense when applied to people with none. BUT it does bring up one horrible moment for me. The other night I was watching the Outdoor channel and anxiously awaiting a new Gun Nuts and happened to watch one of the programs that Midway USA sponsors and they were discussing the M16 when it was first introduced through it's modern counterparts and literally heard one of the so called experts recite the dogma that the round was effective because it tumbled when striking it's intended target! I am not saying that there are not fools everywhere but to have heard it from one of our own strikes fear in my heart. We have a sacred duty to report reality and not the B.S. the media delivers! There were many things that were a problem with the M16 that they didn't even cover which made it stronger and a better weapon no matter which side of the fence you sit on as to whether the cartridge is adequate for the intended purpose but I can't believe they are putting this out and getting it wrong! If we the enlightened are ever to be trusted we must have the right information and real experts not just some cowboy action shooter or ex rock star but pro gun who is raised to expert status by popularity in a TV show!!! OK so I guess that was my rant for the evening but geez our credibility is at stake!!!

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from guncrazy74 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

P.S. I love the show and you guys are doing a great job!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from scratchgolf72 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

good article dave...rachel maddow is truly one dimly lit bulb.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from GregMc wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave,

Seriously though, do you have a link to the Times story you mentioned? I'm sure you have it and I really want to read that story.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Well, at least a dozen above have expressed my very opinion of the libtard media circus that aboutnds.

Consider this: If they can't get simple things right about a simple subject whose info abounds on the internet and printed word, HTH can we trust them to get ANYTHING right?

I have been involved in more than a few newsworthy events in my 60+ years on the planet and without exception the media reports were inaccurate and downright misleading in each and every one. But we can all trust the Capon in Chief 'cause MSNBC sex so, huh?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from fliphuntr14 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I like to have a laugh at anybody that likes to claim that their major "news" network is right and the other is wrong. What fools they must be. haha shane +1 it seems a few missed your comment, great article Mr. Petzal

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Del in KS wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The libs surely know gun control won't stop crime. It is my opinion they want to disarm the American public for a more sinister reason. If they try to take over the country how would an unarmed populace stop them? It can't happen here you say? The more history I read and watch on Mil History channel the more I know it very well could happen here. Folks should read the details of how Hitler came to power. A lot of that situation parallels the problems we have today. We must be vigilant. If you aren't an NRA member you should be.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from davidpetzal wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

To Greg Mc: No, I didn't save it. I wrote a letter to the editor about it and let the piece go. The only thing I can tell you is that it ran sometime this spring, I think in April. The Times makes so many mistakes that it doesn't pay to save them unless they're really horrendous.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from firedog11 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great comments Dave. A couple of points one of which is the educational system which in my county (Loudoun County Va)holds up people like Che as a shining example of Hispanic heritage month. The second is that local groups need to form, in Va it is the Va Citizens Defense League, to defend your rights on the local and state level. Last but not least have you noticed how lame street media has a positive opinion of the rioters and flash mobs running wild in London, Philly and Washington DC. ( Black youth groups have been assaulting tourists down on the mall). It is always because they have no jobs or new x boxes to play with. And it is always the fault of the someone else because these yahoos don't get what they want when they snap their fingers. Last Maddow and Chris Matthews are idiots.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Douglas wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great article and rings true. But, you are preaching to the choir here. How about an attempt to publish this in the New Yorker mag where some intellectual people of that ilk can see truth writ large as well?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Moose1980 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I have a boss who isn't anti-gun, but he didn't know a lot about them when I started working for him. He is also a woodworker and amateur carpenter. When I started talking about guns as tools and explainging the egineering that goes into them, he really got interested. I gave him a couple of books to read and now he'll come in and point out something stupid the media says in regards to guns. We are the sports ambassadors, its up to us to spread the word.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great article dave, I just loaded to to about 1500 people in Facebook, I am sure they will load it to their list of people because the ones on my list are NOT Libtards!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from nc30-06 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

This article, which is so true and well written, reminds me of another topic that the news media screws up by not checking the facts and just being blissfully ignorant. That being anything related to aviation. An observation I and many others have made about the general public is that when a person steps onto an airport, they immediately drop 60 points of their respective IQ. Same with gun haters or non shooters. Bring up the topic of guns and they start drooling and get glassy-eyed in their effort to display their ignorance.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ingebrigtsen wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

A little known fact about guns as covered in the media for reasons listed above is that most cpx2/3 class rifles will penetrate even the highest rated personal bodyarmour..
ive seen as probably alot of u guys have seen that the new whizbang body armour is now rated against 7,62.. but the fact is that the round in question is actually the ak47 7,62x39 round.. not a 308 or higher.. any hunting ammo in 3006 will penetrate the personal bodyarmour.. u dont even need high class ammo, just normal softpoints.. and ive tested my 308 lakelander with the old style winchester silvertip ammo against an inch and 3/4 cast iron plate (actually an old abandoned oversize cooking pot for whaleblubber :P ) and it penetrated cleanly where the nato 7,62 fmj`s just slightly dented it.. heck even a 22lr solid will penetrate, inconsistently but still, soft cop style bodyarmour rated to 44 magnum. and that a 12ga huntingloaded shotgun out to 10 yards will cause so much shock to a body to disable or kill armored personell (12 at 5 yards has as much power as a 300 winmag) what the "jackbooted thugs" of a fascist gouverment should fear is a politically aware populous capable of fighting back with weaponry that will outrange and overpower theire "assault-weaponed" stoogies..
be smart, know how to spot fascism both symbolically :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_symbolism

and as a concept..
and shoot em straight and often! peace out from your favourite/hated upon norskie :P

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Yardbird1948 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

They are not fools. They can sell more papers or receive a greater distribution by issuing inflammatory statements.
They have no motivation to do otherwise, except ethics.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom warner wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

A super blog Dave! I wish that it could be more widely read. Nothing that I could say would improve upon the comments already made by the rest of you. I find it particularly encouraging to know that there are so many knowledgeable, articulate and bright people among us, and I enjoy seeing it proven over and over. The observation that most news reports in which the reader was present or personally involved bear scant resemblance to what actually took place is right on the money! I know this from experience. Our history has proven over and over that the media is terribly flawed, but I do not know what can be done about it. It used to be even worse than now. We cannot remain a republic without a independent media. I sometimes think that human beings are basically fools and we know that there is no cure for stupidity. History keeps proving me right. So, is there any hope?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from kansasjeff wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The worst selling diet book of all time: lose weight by eating less and exercising more. The worst headline in news: gun works as expected. The media only gets people to buy if they release lurid headlines. Personally I’m fine with a certain amount of gun control. ( I’m ok with waiting a few days to be sure the guy in front of me isn’t the next Pablo Escobar and the guy behind me isn’t the next Charlie Manson.) But the media never reports the story of us regular guys just the extreme elements on both sides. I think the guy who wrote "freakanomics" showed that a pool in your backyard was 100 times more likely to kill a child than a gun in the home. And here is the link to actually prove my statment
( take note journalism majors)
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2001/07/levittpoolsvsguns.php

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from DSMbirddog wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The media and newspapers today, for the most part, can only be trusted to supply the basic news. The opinion pieces are just for furthering someone's agenda. Thanks, DP for bringing this one out.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

DEP's post is a very well composed compilation of information that most of us have noticed over the years. Rather than simply verbalize a comment and create a frown like most of us, DEP wrote a sensible and truthful post. That article in addition to those added by others leaves me somewhat wordless other than to say to all of you, well put.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

media today is out to stroke peoples' pleasure centers. that is all. eyeballs on commercials.

Moose1980's comment above is spot on too; we need to educate people ourselves. for example, when I talk with family and say I was out shooting clays, they often ask: "Oh, with the rifle?" I have to explain the difference between a shotgun and a rifle. There is that level of ignorance out there.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from SL wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

"We cannot remain a republic without a independent media."
Exactly how do we go about having an independent media in a capitalistic society?? As far as I know the current media giants are far from not-for-profit organizations. Everything boils down to money and more so in our nation than anywhere else. Absolutely any story you hear or read about in todays media, whether it be left wing or right wing media has some PR guru behind the scenes pushing for the story to be told the way they want it to be told. Typically there is some sort of pay off involved to tell the story. Absolutely NOTHING is unbiased and never will be when MONEY drives everything in the society we live in.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark-1 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Excellent rant, DP. Next to "Fast and Furious" scandal I believe the upcoming story will be how NICS system is being abused by PC states. The oversight and liblity is shockingly absent.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bellringer wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I have long held that the news media is the moral equivalent of a street whore.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Avon wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

No one who has worked for a news organization can deny the anti-gun slant. I spent 40 years in newspapers, mostly as the token pro-gun-rights reporter/editor/editorial writer -- the guy at whom everybody looked askance, but to whom they came to ask the most basic questions about guns or gun-related technical questions.

There's one small nuance to add to what Dave wrote. It's about the relationship between reporters and cops, and cops and guns.

First off, most reporters are truly ignorant of all things gun. Their exposure to firearms usually involves violent crime, where bad people use guns to harm good people. In the absence of any exculpatory evidence to the contrary, that tends to poison their minds.

Then, reporters ask cops gun questions, and accept as fact what they are told. And, not to offend any LE readers here, but lots of, if not most, cops are not particularly knowledgeable about firearms. Just like most reporters don't know much about the tools of their trade -- the computers upon which they write their stories -- lots of cops don't know much more about their firearms than how to load and shoot them well enough to pass qualifications. I know this first-hand.

So when reporters ask cops questions such as,"What kinds of guns did the bad guys use," they get answers like "AK-47's" -- based not on any eyewitness evidence, but on empty cartridge cases found at the scene.

That's the way our paper once embarrassed itself with a reference to a "semi-automatic revolver" having been used in a crime. No, it was not a Webley-Fosbery; it was a cheap, throw-down wheelgun, but the cop had told the reporter it was a semi-auto revolver, and she took him at his word.

Somebody up above got it very right: If jurnos cannot be accurate about basic, commonly known, readily determinable gun facts, how can we trust them to be accurate about anything? Some reporters and editors understand that. Sadly, most don't.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntenthusiest wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

National Geographic recently aired a story of a major bank heist that occurred back in 1976. In it, they showed some of the weapons used that included Glock pistols. In 1976?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom warner wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

To SL: You of course are mostly correct in your comment regarding the sold-out media, but on the other hand, much of what we commonly refer to as "alternate" media is in fact sort of independent, such as Field & Stream Magazine and many others. While they all promote a certain point of view, most do so without telling blatant lies, and I would think could be thought of as part of a free press. So, I guess that is what I meant, maybe poorly expressed.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappadave wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I knew that something had gone wrong with "journalism" the moment I discovered that 85%+ of "journalism" students at our universities say they majored in journalism because they, "want to make a difference," instead of insure that the public is accurately informed. These useful idiots have been convinced--likely by their instructors in the public schools or the university of their choice--that pushing THEIR political philosophy is a proper function of "journalists."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappadave wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I knew that something had gone wrong with "journalism" the moment I discovered that 85%+ of "journalism" students at our universities say they majored in journalism because they, "want to make a difference," instead of insure that the public is accurately informed. These useful idiots have been convinced--likely by their instructors in the public schools or the university of their choice--that pushing THEIR political philosophy is a proper function of "journalists."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappadave wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I knew that something had gone wrong with "journalism" the moment I discovered that 85%+ of "journalism" students at our universities say they majored in journalism because they, "want to make a difference," instead of insure that the public is accurately informed. These useful idiots have been convinced--likely by their instructors in the public schools or the university of their choice--that pushing THEIR political philosophy is a proper function of "journalists."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nixstyx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Until about six months ago I had worked as a reporter for a small newspaper for five years, and found my co-workers’ knowledge of guns (or hunting, fishing and the outdoors in general) severely lacking. It’s an interesting problem, since most reporters I know are generally curious people that want to get their facts straight. However, for some reason, there seems to be very little curiosity when it comes to firearms. The real problem, however, isn’t with “the media.” I’d say the general public is largely ignorant of guns, and many reporters just happen to have a job that requires them to write or speak about topics they may not be entirely knowledgeable about. We can’t blame “the media” for erasing the general public’s knowledge of firearms when that knowledge was never there to start with. And while newspapers and news networks could—and maybe should—do a much better job of educating the public about guns, that’s not the real solution (you don’t believe everything you see on TV anyway, right?) Yes, “the media” is perpetuating the problem, but they didn’t invent it. When was the last time the average city-dwelling student learned anything about firearms, hunting or fishing in school? For that matter, when was the last time their parents taught them anything? Most children grow up in a world in which their only exposure to guns is in movies, video games or violent crime (I won’t get started on the problems associated with that kind of exposure). We’ve come a long way from the days when a boy had to be more proficient with a rifle than with a computer, but let’s not pin that societal change on “the media” as an example of how they are dumbing-down society—we have plenty of better examples to choose from.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

What's even worse, I've talked to Veteran Law Enforcement Officers, Military etc and they say the most outrages statements that defy the laws of physics!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from James Miller wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel, thanks for that excellent piece of writing. The media is not interested in truth. It is interested in changing society to its perversion of truth. To do this they employ the tactic of repeating lies over and over until the public is numb, and starts to see the lie as being the truth. It's taken 60 years of this to get us to where we are today.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from wingshooter54 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The moral responsibility previously adhered to by the national media began to decay with Dan Rather's baseless and unverified allegations against George Bush. His actions cost him his job; today it would not. Such a travesty would never have occurred on Walter Cronkite's watch. News media today is not about the news and objective, truthful reporting....it is about entertainment, ratings, and advertising; truth in reporting is not a consideration. The members of "The Five"-Fox's new round table discussion show, are instructed to joke and pick at each other throughout the show. A funny guy, a serious guy, two smoking hot babes, and ultra liberal (The NRA thinks everyone should own a machine gun and an army tank) Bob Beckell; buffoon, loudmouth, and complete idiot. So who talks the most? Beckell, the mountain of misinformation.("Why even have a debt ceiling?) This is the level of decay the former esteemed Fourth Estate has fallen to. Does the NRA get equal time to refute the "machine gun & army tank" claim? No, and even if they did, the damage is already done....I'am a hunter, shooter, gun collector, retired Journalism, English, and Photography teacher and NRA LIFE MEMBER! Liberals say I'm dangerous.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

It's not the media's job to accurately report the truth from an objective standpoint. Their job is to make headlines, sound bites and Emmy-nominated stories that sell copy, improve Nielsen ratings, and interest advertisers. I firmly believe that they are as honest as they have to be, by threat of discovery and loss of creditability, or when being so supports their initial aims. Any appearance of anything otherwise is just an illusion.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Wingshooter beat me to it. Work-related Rantus interruptus.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WesMcCormick wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

In November of 2012 when you prepare to cast your ballot, I want everyone to think of this piece here and cast your vote as such

(X) Petzal, David E. -Party Affiliation- American

Keep em coming Dave

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Wapiti wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave,
As several have mentioned here, it is not just gun stories that the press gets wrong (though they do seem to work overtime distorting gun issues). I have worked in law enforcement for over thirty years, and have had detailed knowledge of many issues that have made the news. In essentially EVERY case, the press has gotten it wrong on significant, easily verifiable facts. And I am not talking about typographical errors or transposed numbers. They get the significant facts wrong over and over again. I have made a casual game of fact-checking the stories of which I have knowledge, and I can't remember one that passed without error.

You see the errors in gun stories because you know guns. I see errors in police stories that involve me because that is something that I know. nc30-06 sees errors in aviation stories. I'm sure that dentists and shoe salesmen and chefs see errors in stories about their occupations too, whenever they make the news. Fortunately for reporters, most people's occupations don't generate press stories very often, so most readers have no idea how often the reporters are getting it wrong.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ruckweiler wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Maddow and her ilk are educated? In what, underwater basket-weaving? Their illogic, lack of reasoning, and, as the author mentioned, lack of inquiry, doesn't much describe a thinking animal. This is what passes, I suppose, for intellectualism in their circle.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from MReeder wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

DP,
I am afraid you are too kind by half when it comes to what most reporters know and don't know. In fact, it has been my experience that they know as little about the military and economics as they do about guns, which is to say, when it comes to at least 99-percent of them, absolutely nothing.
I base than on about 30-years spent laboring in various media, including print, radio and television. While working near Fort Sill I had to constantly soothe the offended sensibilities of folks at Fort Sill, when despite my constant upbraiding (I was a news anchor/senior producer) reporters insisted on calling the post a base.
When it comes to matters of finance and economics, I believe I met over the course of those three decades maybe half a dozen reporters, at most, who could differentiate between Adam Smith and Will Smith and fewer than that who grasped the profit motive.
As for guns, I worked with one photographer from Marlin, Texas with a working knowledge of firearms. None of the others knew the difference between a semi-auto or an auto, a pistol or a revolver, or a shotgun or a rifle for that matter. None I knew had ever owned a gun and with only one or two exceptions none had ever fired a gun. They certainly had no idea how guns worked or possessed the faintest knowledge of ballistics. None of this kept them from opining on the subject, of course, since they viewed actual knowledge as nothing more than a flimsy impediment to their opinions.
I did what little I could do, including a feature at the local gun club demonstrating the difference between semi-autos and full autos during the great "assault gun" debate, initiated as many stories as I could manage that put hunting in an admirable light and headed off a couple of nonsensical stories based on bullet performances that would have given new meaning to the term "magic bullet."
I think the reason for this abysmal state lies in the chosen field. People of more conservative and/or practical outlook and nature tend to gravitate toward red-blooded American activities like business, engineering, construction and finance, while those of a more liberal, theoretical outlook go to law and journalism school, where Beelzebub and his minions, posing as college professors, wait eagerly, rubbing their hands together and drooling with anticipation at the idea of filling their new victims' empty heads with contempt for the entire span of western civilization.
As to what one can do, all I can suggest is to write or call the offending paper, radio or television station whenever it disseminates something especially idiotic, and raise polite but holy Hell.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mac in Mo wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Another example; When the NRA held it's meeting here in St. Louis a few years back, a local gasbag politician declared that the NRA was selling guns out of trunks of cars in the alleyways. The reporter never batted an eye and the bloviation continued unabated and unquestioned. There are countless examples of this type of bias, and everyone knows it.

Kevin

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Sorry if I offended anyone at F&S geez, now your being PC, but google Rachel Maddow and draw your own conclusion.
Shame on you for double standards.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from hengst wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Nice piece of journalism! You stated a point and backed it up with solid evidence. If more "journalists used this approach we wouldn't have this problem.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from chaslee wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave, It is refreshing to hear you espouse what us bums have been saying and have known for years, which some idiots can't figure out, other than us bums that pay our bills, work our butts off, send a couple days at a hunting camp or at the range. I hope they shoot their eye out with a BB gun.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

@ingebrigtsen,

you still have the Lakelander. I only read about it in the 1990's in another magazine (associated with Intermedia) and the report was that it grouped the same even when it got hot, and had a finish designed to survive an acid bath. Too bad it didn't become a big seller in the US.
keep shooting.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ILBassin wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

i agree with everything u said dave except the fact about the drug cartels having these unlimited budgets that they don't need the "straw men" to purchase the firearms for them.I read an article in USA Today that man was just arrested in arizona for purchasing firearms and supplying them to the cartels. he purchased 720 guns in total.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from RandyMI wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Sensationalism and Spin---- It seems to play in every arena! It's the same all over. Who is trying to call to account all the college-educated clowns and crooks that brought the sub-prime mortgage debacle on everyone? Just as in religion, the guy with the real truth is scorned while the shyster willing to 'tickle ears' is adored.
Even if they're too ignorant to know what is good for them, people WILL HAVE WHAT THEY WANT!

Randy/MI

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Maybe Rachael Maddow's partner Susan believes all the BS she spews. I can't watch that crap. Too bad she has a Black Labrador held captive who will never get a chance to do what he was created to do .... hunt!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from tdhoneycutt wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I was a journalist for 15 years, and I discovered that some journalists are biased, closed-minded folk who really are intellectually lazy. Beware those like that who become editors and news assignment editors, because the biases and closed-mindedness will be magnified.
If you want a gun-related story covered in the media, go to the outdoors editor or a writer you know has covered gun issues in the past.
Favorite politics related piece: John Kerry, running for president, showed up to hunt pheasants with a shotgun. New York Times photo caption identified the firearm as a rifle.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from tdhoneycutt wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I was a journalist for 15 years, and I discovered that some journalists are biased, closed-minded folk who really are intellectually lazy. Beware those like that who become editors and news assignment editors, because the biases and closed-mindedness will be magnified.
Favorite politics related piece: John Kerry, running for president, showed up to hunt pheasants with a shotgun. New York Times photo caption identified the firearm as a rifle.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dennis Rahn wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I am dismayed by the amount of Field & Stream readers that don't belong to the National Rifle Association and think others are doing the job of protecting our Second Amendment.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The fact that Miss Maddow has a girlfriend (partner is too PC for me, thanks) has about as much to do with this conversation as the fact that Harry Truman wore horn-rimmed glasses.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nyflyangler wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

So what? That the media usually screw up the details when they write about technical subjects has never been a surprise. This is non-news.

Just more of Petzal's usual pedantic hysterical writing. Demonstrating he's just yet another journalist who elevates his opinion to the level of fact and assigning nefarious motives to others ignorance. Not a dime's woth of difference between them and him.

Maybe F&S should change his name to Putzal for accuracies sake.

-6 Good Comment? | | Report
from MJC wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

This will probably become one of this site's most linked to articles.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from DaleM wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

GREAT piece of writing Mr. P!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gerald Keller wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I enjoyed this article! Particularly the "magazine" and "clip" mistake they all make. I will not say what I think about students of journalism, but from how most cover guns and gun topics - they didn't learn anything about being knowlegeable, as your article points out. Thanks!
PS: Remember all you reporters out there, a clip goes in a Garand rifle, and magazines insert into most modern semi automatic pistols, into the handle.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Del in KS wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

On the event of Bill Clinton's election I went from annual to Life Member of the NRA. Here's and idea if you have a hunting buddy that is not a member why don't you gift him a years membership. It's not very expensive (about the price of a box of shells) and we will have another member. Some will no doubt renew.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Carl Huber wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave your all wet. The TRUTH and COMMON SENSE never sold and never will and it only appeals to a very small audience. My dad was a contractor who worked for a hard drinking, law & order Irish catholic news paper guy. Back in the 60's he was vehemently anti police and pro-liberal. Knowing Mr. Breslins true leanings. My dad asked "why Mr Breslin". His reply "Karl the worst contempt for people in my profession is silent contempt". True story!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from tmbryant wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Look what gun control is doing for Great Britain right now with rioting, looting and burning. If store owners could defend their businesses and the police themselves could carry firearms, they would be a lot better off in controlling the rioters. But, when the gangs no that they wont' be shot when breaking in to these businesses and that the police normally have no weapons, what's to deter them? Their basic humanity?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Watching "Wild Russia" the other night, they were calling Moose "ELK", NO LIE!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Clay, in Russia, as well as Europe, an Elg, or Eich, or some such variation of "elk" IS a moose, as per N. American usage.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Sorry Clay, I meant Elch. That's the German.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Fat guy Aaron wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I remember the claims of American guns going to Mexico during "obama mania" at that time demand was so high, AK47s were going around $800 bucks and I'm a firearm dealer in Arizona 1.5 hours from the boarder. Every idiot watching the news was nagging me about it. My response was why would they spend 800 bucks when they could spend 150 on one from Columbia already auto. And why would I risk my lively-hood and possibly go to prison to make the owner 800 bucks when I could stay totally legit, out of jail, making 30,000 dollars a year. The media zombies still didn't get it. It's so much like Orwell's 1984 everybody is mesmerized by the picture box in the living room and have been totally drained of independent thought.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Elk has always been given to the biggest deer of any area. In India, for example, the sambar deer is considered "the elk".

I think when the Europeans came to North America and first encountered the WAPITI, they thought it was the biggest deer and called it elk. Then they moved further north and saw and even bigger deer (and the true cousin of the European Elk), and having already given "elk" to someone, decided to call it moose.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dbarry wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Excellent piece Dave. FocusFront: +1 right on the money. So much "journalism" today is so biased, I cant stand to read or listen to it.

My son has a cool t-shirt that has an outline of a big gun the word ABORTION, and the words: "wonder what they'd say if they used guns..." Probably makes a couple of them (liberals) scratch their heads! Naaaaah.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from scratchgolf72 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

i doubt that the media even cares what they know about guns, as long as they can put them into a bad light they are fine with the garbage they spew out to the uneducated american people who believe it.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from fishrmn100 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Give me the truth and then show me the proof. I don't go for hearsay.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from etexan wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

There was a time when news was dispensed by radio and newspapers and even TV for a while to inform the people about what was going on in our society. Even protected by the Constitution. Entities have discovered they can influence how we think and vote by reporting what/how they want to so that now, none of those entities may be reliable. We have a representative government who represents themselves and others who conspire to have laws enacted to enhance the rich and powerful (who really need no more). And we keep electing them. Our type of government depends on us to make good choices or at least cast out those who don't do a good job.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from wingshooter54 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

etexan:
The problem with casting out those who don't do a good job is the alarming fact that people who work for a living and pay taxes are seriously outnumbered by those who vote for a living.......why should you vote someone out of office who is willing to hand you money while you sit on your ass? I know people who did not vote in the last presidential election because they did not like Obama or McCain..too dumb to realize not voting was a vote for Obama. You can bet every SOB on some sort of entitlement took their ass to the polls even if they had to hitch a ride with ACORN...gun owners and sportsmen across America better band together and get people to the polls in 2012....vote for Rick Perry; he will run.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

wingshooter54:

I like your comment (minus the Perry endorsement for now, too early for me). Scary thought about the freeloaders.

And, if you don't vote, you are disrespecting every single person who has died for this country. It doesn't matter who you vote for, JUST DO IT!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from amzbrady@aol.com wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

We need to get rid of the NRA (National Rifle Association) and get the NFA (National Firearm Association) established. The NRA does not support all facets of the 2nd ammendment. They really dont do much for Pistol owners.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bellringer wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

To amzbrady - SAY WHAT? You are undoubtedly the biggest sxxxhead ever to post on this blog or else a troll as your name would possibly suggest. What do you base you assumption on, the name National RIFLE Association. You need to learn about things before you speak.

Remember the old adage, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt".

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from alohabobby wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Well, you can include yourself in that dissembling media gang. Practice what you preach.

"Ballistic footprint" is a commonly used term and shows countless returns on Google and other search engines. Whether it is fitting to use it regarding a bullet rather than a guided missile is another issue. But it is a common term in - surprise - ballistics.

As to the Smith & Wesson accidentally discharging, you say "Even if the revolver was cocked, it’s highly unlikely that it could fire." "Highly unlikely" is quite a bit different than "impossible." You sort of shot yourself in the foot (no pun intended) on that one. Regardless, I'll take the officer's word on it.

Rachel Maddow is not in any sense of the word a reporter. She's a commentarist. She will be no more or less accurate in her polemics than Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from lyndonavery wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

You are absolutely right Dave and that is why this country is spiraling downward with every passing day. I will never understand why so many lap the crap the new media spreads up so much, but they do, and it only makes all things worse, sorry to say.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from square_peg wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Rachel Maddow is a smart woman about many things but I can't stand to listen to her when she starts going on about gun control. She's a good example of how an otherwise intelligent person can have some wildly idealistic and crazy notions.

We're seeing a lot of this these days from both extremes of the political spectrum.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dougded wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Ms Maddow is neither smart not knowledgable. She is a reader with an agenda. Like almost all media types, she pursues her agenda so she will be accepted by her peers. They don't know why they hate guns, but it is the thing they are suppose to do. The media has foresaken it's Constitutional duty to be a free press and inform the electorate. In a sentence.... The media should be taken out and tarred and feathered at the same time the politicians are. We need neither in their current form.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from oldshooter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Here I am reading this rant by a guy my age and with whom I served in the same war. Where are all the young bucks that should be writing these articles? Let Petzal
retire. But wait, there would not be any of these observations, for the very reasons stated. Keep up the good work, Mr. Petzal, you continue telling it like it is and I'll read it. (By the way, like your segments on the tv show. Can you get more on rifles, and less on those silly guns posing as rifles?)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tc505 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

something that ticks me off to no end is every time the news comes on there is a shooting and the picture is always of an ak47!! these people have no clue on any of what they are supposed to be reporting about and the pictures never match. recently a man walked into an office and he shot several rounds with a semi-auto pistol and the picture was of a revolver. another used an ar15 but the ever loving ak47 picture was right up there describing the weapon he used. nuts!!!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Jim in Mo, Here is wikipedia's take om "IT" Maddow!!!!!!!!! About 90% accurate! JMNSVHO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Maddow

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

WAM,
Wow you got away with saying that and I got slammed because I thought she was mad that her girlfried licked her the wrong way!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joes_4570 wrote 2 years 34 weeks ago

They can't outlaw guns cause they wouldn't have room to keep all the "outlaws" that would keep them anyways

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from bluegraytx wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

The kids were watching Diehard 2 (the airport) the other night while I was attempting to read an article. About halfway into the movie Bruce Willis commented that the bad guys were carrying Glocks with glass barrels that could get past security. Perhaps this is where the rumor gained credence. I believe the movie was relased ca. 1998.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from huntnow wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

It is a scary world out there. Much of the fear is media driven and media invented.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from USMC Limey wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

My brain just about explodes every time I read an anti-gunners article. I'm sick of hearing about high-capacity "Clips" (incidentally they consider the standard 15rd Magazine that my Glock 19 has as being "High Capacity"), I really wish I knew what a "cop killer bullet" was (any projectile that can tell what your profession is must be high tech).
My favorite misused term has to be "Common-Sense", doesn't it stand to reason that trying to impose regulations that have failed to achieve the desired results in every country that has adopted them is in fact non-sensical ? If I'm non mistaken, trying the same thing repeatedly and expecting the same result is in fact stupidity. Maybe they should be honest and refer to their measures as "Common Stupidity" to avoid wasting the time of the Generally Disinterested public who usually make their decision at the poll based on a candidates charm and linguistic eloquence.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from JohnR wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I've posted this before but I'll reiterate. I was in LE when the "cop killer bullet" controversy was news. The original reports referred to the hardened brass core Nyclad bullet produced by KTW which BTW was not ever offered for civilian sale. It was produced specifically for LE officers when they had to fire at a "hardened" target such as a car body. The nefarious NBC ran a special in 1982 about those bullets because they were capable of penetrating the soft body armor worn by most police agencies. What affected us in LE the most was that back in 1982 it wasn't very well known that we were wearing soft body armor under our shirts. Most people thought of body armor as the heavy ceramic or metallic stuff police strapped on the outside of their uniforms. I'll never forget the comment that one of our officers made following the NBC special that revealed the police officers wear "soft" body armor under their shirts. He said "Great, now all the dirt bags in the country will shoot at my head!"
Also Wayne LaPierre didn't come up with the "Jack booted thugs" referral to the BATFE. He was repeating that comment originally coined by Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman. The press however was all to happy to give all the (negative) credit to Wayne.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

“At first glance, it may seem odd or even perverse to suggest that statutory controls on the private ownership of firearms are irrelevant to the problem of armed crime: yet that is precisely what the evidence shows. Armed crime and violent crime generally are products of ethnic and social factors unrelated to the availability of a particular type of weapon. The number of firearms required to satisfy the crime market is minute, and these are supplied no matter what controls are instituted. Controls have had serious effect on legitimate users of firearms, but there is no case, either in the history of this country (Britain) or in the experience of other countries in which controls can be shown to have restricted the flow of weapons to criminals, or in any way reduce crime.”
-Chief Inspector Colins Greenwood, West Yorkshire Constabulary, Police Review, Britain after six months of study of firearms control systems at Cambridge University

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Yardbird1948 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

They are not fools. They can sell more papers or receive a greater distribution by issuing inflammatory statements.
They have no motivation to do otherwise, except ethics.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nixstyx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Until about six months ago I had worked as a reporter for a small newspaper for five years, and found my co-workers’ knowledge of guns (or hunting, fishing and the outdoors in general) severely lacking. It’s an interesting problem, since most reporters I know are generally curious people that want to get their facts straight. However, for some reason, there seems to be very little curiosity when it comes to firearms. The real problem, however, isn’t with “the media.” I’d say the general public is largely ignorant of guns, and many reporters just happen to have a job that requires them to write or speak about topics they may not be entirely knowledgeable about. We can’t blame “the media” for erasing the general public’s knowledge of firearms when that knowledge was never there to start with. And while newspapers and news networks could—and maybe should—do a much better job of educating the public about guns, that’s not the real solution (you don’t believe everything you see on TV anyway, right?) Yes, “the media” is perpetuating the problem, but they didn’t invent it. When was the last time the average city-dwelling student learned anything about firearms, hunting or fishing in school? For that matter, when was the last time their parents taught them anything? Most children grow up in a world in which their only exposure to guns is in movies, video games or violent crime (I won’t get started on the problems associated with that kind of exposure). We’ve come a long way from the days when a boy had to be more proficient with a rifle than with a computer, but let’s not pin that societal change on “the media” as an example of how they are dumbing-down society—we have plenty of better examples to choose from.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from TAM9492 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Excellent piece of writing.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

You cannot make a living as a journalist by telling the truth. It's too boring.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Do not know why LaPierre's comment concerning the ATF being Jack Booted Thugs even made the news. Many in the Reagan administration considered the ATF to be just that and in the early 80's wanted to disband the ATF and hand the duties over to the Secret Service. A better trained group. Then Waco and Ruby Ridge only confirmed to the whole world what the ATF was all about. LaPierre hit the nail on the head.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from guncrazy74 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Ahh my dear friend Dave.
So nice to hear so much sense when applied to people with none. BUT it does bring up one horrible moment for me. The other night I was watching the Outdoor channel and anxiously awaiting a new Gun Nuts and happened to watch one of the programs that Midway USA sponsors and they were discussing the M16 when it was first introduced through it's modern counterparts and literally heard one of the so called experts recite the dogma that the round was effective because it tumbled when striking it's intended target! I am not saying that there are not fools everywhere but to have heard it from one of our own strikes fear in my heart. We have a sacred duty to report reality and not the B.S. the media delivers! There were many things that were a problem with the M16 that they didn't even cover which made it stronger and a better weapon no matter which side of the fence you sit on as to whether the cartridge is adequate for the intended purpose but I can't believe they are putting this out and getting it wrong! If we the enlightened are ever to be trusted we must have the right information and real experts not just some cowboy action shooter or ex rock star but pro gun who is raised to expert status by popularity in a TV show!!! OK so I guess that was my rant for the evening but geez our credibility is at stake!!!

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Moose1980 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I have a boss who isn't anti-gun, but he didn't know a lot about them when I started working for him. He is also a woodworker and amateur carpenter. When I started talking about guns as tools and explainging the egineering that goes into them, he really got interested. I gave him a couple of books to read and now he'll come in and point out something stupid the media says in regards to guns. We are the sports ambassadors, its up to us to spread the word.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from ingebrigtsen wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

A little known fact about guns as covered in the media for reasons listed above is that most cpx2/3 class rifles will penetrate even the highest rated personal bodyarmour..
ive seen as probably alot of u guys have seen that the new whizbang body armour is now rated against 7,62.. but the fact is that the round in question is actually the ak47 7,62x39 round.. not a 308 or higher.. any hunting ammo in 3006 will penetrate the personal bodyarmour.. u dont even need high class ammo, just normal softpoints.. and ive tested my 308 lakelander with the old style winchester silvertip ammo against an inch and 3/4 cast iron plate (actually an old abandoned oversize cooking pot for whaleblubber :P ) and it penetrated cleanly where the nato 7,62 fmj`s just slightly dented it.. heck even a 22lr solid will penetrate, inconsistently but still, soft cop style bodyarmour rated to 44 magnum. and that a 12ga huntingloaded shotgun out to 10 yards will cause so much shock to a body to disable or kill armored personell (12 at 5 yards has as much power as a 300 winmag) what the "jackbooted thugs" of a fascist gouverment should fear is a politically aware populous capable of fighting back with weaponry that will outrange and overpower theire "assault-weaponed" stoogies..
be smart, know how to spot fascism both symbolically :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_symbolism

and as a concept..
and shoot em straight and often! peace out from your favourite/hated upon norskie :P

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Avon wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

No one who has worked for a news organization can deny the anti-gun slant. I spent 40 years in newspapers, mostly as the token pro-gun-rights reporter/editor/editorial writer -- the guy at whom everybody looked askance, but to whom they came to ask the most basic questions about guns or gun-related technical questions.

There's one small nuance to add to what Dave wrote. It's about the relationship between reporters and cops, and cops and guns.

First off, most reporters are truly ignorant of all things gun. Their exposure to firearms usually involves violent crime, where bad people use guns to harm good people. In the absence of any exculpatory evidence to the contrary, that tends to poison their minds.

Then, reporters ask cops gun questions, and accept as fact what they are told. And, not to offend any LE readers here, but lots of, if not most, cops are not particularly knowledgeable about firearms. Just like most reporters don't know much about the tools of their trade -- the computers upon which they write their stories -- lots of cops don't know much more about their firearms than how to load and shoot them well enough to pass qualifications. I know this first-hand.

So when reporters ask cops questions such as,"What kinds of guns did the bad guys use," they get answers like "AK-47's" -- based not on any eyewitness evidence, but on empty cartridge cases found at the scene.

That's the way our paper once embarrassed itself with a reference to a "semi-automatic revolver" having been used in a crime. No, it was not a Webley-Fosbery; it was a cheap, throw-down wheelgun, but the cop had told the reporter it was a semi-auto revolver, and she took him at his word.

Somebody up above got it very right: If jurnos cannot be accurate about basic, commonly known, readily determinable gun facts, how can we trust them to be accurate about anything? Some reporters and editors understand that. Sadly, most don't.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dennis Rahn wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I am dismayed by the amount of Field & Stream readers that don't belong to the National Rifle Association and think others are doing the job of protecting our Second Amendment.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The fact that Miss Maddow has a girlfriend (partner is too PC for me, thanks) has about as much to do with this conversation as the fact that Harry Truman wore horn-rimmed glasses.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from RJ Arena wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The only way we can fight this madness that I know of, is to invite a non-gun person to shoot. I have done this many times, and have had successes every time. Once they understand that fear is their enemy, not the firearm, they see shooting for what it is, practical and fun!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I like to have a laugh at anybody that likes to claim that their major "news" network is right and the other is wrong. What fools they must be.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Here's a good lie -

If we banned those 30 round Satan clips, many many lives would have been saved in Tucson.

How long do they think it takes to change magazines? Not very. Might have saved one life. Maybe, but probably not.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Muleynut30.06 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

a perfect example of this is when the media tried to take down the legendary model 700. I thought it was pretty impessive how quickly that story died due to the counter report by remington. Like everyone said media is the basis of fear and people jump right on board when guns are involved.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from mike55 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Right on Dave! Here's one to shut up the "media gestapo elite" when they come up with their buzz words to distort, inflame or sensationalize a subject like the Right to Bear Arms, to their political philosophies and leanings. I wish Sarah Palin, when being grilled by Charlie Gibson before the Presidential Election on assault weapons would have said to him, "Charlie, I would like to know exactly what an assault weapon is, so we can clarify what we're talking about? You're an intelligent man and supposedly deal in facts so you should be able to tell me and the American public right now what an assault weapon is." Would have shut him up right there because they know it's a vague term that sounds bad or dangerous, that could include a large portion of American sporting and defense arms, therefore making it easier to demonize and ban more guns in one fell swoop. If he didn't get it and kept egging her on about "assault weapons" she should have said, "Are we talking about fully automatic military machine guns which are illegal for the public to own without a special permit or are talking about semi-automatic sporting and defense arms that a large portion of the American public own?" Maybe he would get it then because their motives (the leftist media) have been exposed. The asleep American public that keeps voting in these deceivers that are trying to ban all their guns could wake up and say " maybe they're talking about my semi-auto .22, shotgun, deer rifle or pistol." Politicians that are standing up for our constitutional rights have to know how to handle the media's deceptive phrases and "buzz" words.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tony Berg wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Liberals want to outlaw all guns and add more government and restrictions to your life..... Well, I have noticed that drugs are illegal but many people still attain them. I have noticed that prohibition outlawed alcohol and turned common street thugs into deadly organized gangs. Hell, drinking and driving are illegal and how many people participate in that crime every weekend. For Gods sake, outlawing guns will not work. It will take guns out of law abiding citizens hands and put them into criminals hands. Can you imagine a country where the only people with guns would be criminals and the government....... If that doesn't scare the crap out of you I don't know what will.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from focusfront wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

It's not just guns. Actually, the media can't get anything right about anything on the traditional/ conservative side of the room. Ask them about the Tea Party, any right-to-life (anti-abortion) organization, the Christian church, marriage, etc.; you'll get that same glassy eyed stare.

Media's biggest problem is laziness. Back when I worked in the public sector as a public safety officer, I used to read newspaper reports about incidents I'd been to that were so far from accurate that sometimes I didn't know I had been there until I read the address the incident took place at. In a deadline heavy business like the news, it takes too much time to ask questions. Better to skim the surface and fill in the rest of the blanks with insights retained from your liberal arts education than to get it right and get beat by another reporter.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Douglas wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great article and rings true. But, you are preaching to the choir here. How about an attempt to publish this in the New Yorker mag where some intellectual people of that ilk can see truth writ large as well?

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from DSMbirddog wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The media and newspapers today, for the most part, can only be trusted to supply the basic news. The opinion pieces are just for furthering someone's agenda. Thanks, DP for bringing this one out.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

media today is out to stroke peoples' pleasure centers. that is all. eyeballs on commercials.

Moose1980's comment above is spot on too; we need to educate people ourselves. for example, when I talk with family and say I was out shooting clays, they often ask: "Oh, with the rifle?" I have to explain the difference between a shotgun and a rifle. There is that level of ignorance out there.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from SL wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

"We cannot remain a republic without a independent media."
Exactly how do we go about having an independent media in a capitalistic society?? As far as I know the current media giants are far from not-for-profit organizations. Everything boils down to money and more so in our nation than anywhere else. Absolutely any story you hear or read about in todays media, whether it be left wing or right wing media has some PR guru behind the scenes pushing for the story to be told the way they want it to be told. Typically there is some sort of pay off involved to tell the story. Absolutely NOTHING is unbiased and never will be when MONEY drives everything in the society we live in.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bellringer wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I have long held that the news media is the moral equivalent of a street whore.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Wapiti wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave,
As several have mentioned here, it is not just gun stories that the press gets wrong (though they do seem to work overtime distorting gun issues). I have worked in law enforcement for over thirty years, and have had detailed knowledge of many issues that have made the news. In essentially EVERY case, the press has gotten it wrong on significant, easily verifiable facts. And I am not talking about typographical errors or transposed numbers. They get the significant facts wrong over and over again. I have made a casual game of fact-checking the stories of which I have knowledge, and I can't remember one that passed without error.

You see the errors in gun stories because you know guns. I see errors in police stories that involve me because that is something that I know. nc30-06 sees errors in aviation stories. I'm sure that dentists and shoe salesmen and chefs see errors in stories about their occupations too, whenever they make the news. Fortunately for reporters, most people's occupations don't generate press stories very often, so most readers have no idea how often the reporters are getting it wrong.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mac in Mo wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Another example; When the NRA held it's meeting here in St. Louis a few years back, a local gasbag politician declared that the NRA was selling guns out of trunks of cars in the alleyways. The reporter never batted an eye and the bloviation continued unabated and unquestioned. There are countless examples of this type of bias, and everyone knows it.

Kevin

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

@ingebrigtsen,

you still have the Lakelander. I only read about it in the 1990's in another magazine (associated with Intermedia) and the report was that it grouped the same even when it got hot, and had a finish designed to survive an acid bath. Too bad it didn't become a big seller in the US.
keep shooting.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from RandyMI wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Sensationalism and Spin---- It seems to play in every arena! It's the same all over. Who is trying to call to account all the college-educated clowns and crooks that brought the sub-prime mortgage debacle on everyone? Just as in religion, the guy with the real truth is scorned while the shyster willing to 'tickle ears' is adored.
Even if they're too ignorant to know what is good for them, people WILL HAVE WHAT THEY WANT!

Randy/MI

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from tdhoneycutt wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I was a journalist for 15 years, and I discovered that some journalists are biased, closed-minded folk who really are intellectually lazy. Beware those like that who become editors and news assignment editors, because the biases and closed-mindedness will be magnified.
If you want a gun-related story covered in the media, go to the outdoors editor or a writer you know has covered gun issues in the past.
Favorite politics related piece: John Kerry, running for president, showed up to hunt pheasants with a shotgun. New York Times photo caption identified the firearm as a rifle.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Del in KS wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

On the event of Bill Clinton's election I went from annual to Life Member of the NRA. Here's and idea if you have a hunting buddy that is not a member why don't you gift him a years membership. It's not very expensive (about the price of a box of shells) and we will have another member. Some will no doubt renew.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Fat guy Aaron wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I remember the claims of American guns going to Mexico during "obama mania" at that time demand was so high, AK47s were going around $800 bucks and I'm a firearm dealer in Arizona 1.5 hours from the boarder. Every idiot watching the news was nagging me about it. My response was why would they spend 800 bucks when they could spend 150 on one from Columbia already auto. And why would I risk my lively-hood and possibly go to prison to make the owner 800 bucks when I could stay totally legit, out of jail, making 30,000 dollars a year. The media zombies still didn't get it. It's so much like Orwell's 1984 everybody is mesmerized by the picture box in the living room and have been totally drained of independent thought.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from wingshooter54 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

etexan:
The problem with casting out those who don't do a good job is the alarming fact that people who work for a living and pay taxes are seriously outnumbered by those who vote for a living.......why should you vote someone out of office who is willing to hand you money while you sit on your ass? I know people who did not vote in the last presidential election because they did not like Obama or McCain..too dumb to realize not voting was a vote for Obama. You can bet every SOB on some sort of entitlement took their ass to the polls even if they had to hitch a ride with ACORN...gun owners and sportsmen across America better band together and get people to the polls in 2012....vote for Rick Perry; he will run.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from lyndonavery wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

You are absolutely right Dave and that is why this country is spiraling downward with every passing day. I will never understand why so many lap the crap the new media spreads up so much, but they do, and it only makes all things worse, sorry to say.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

On the local news the other night, it was "reported" that some chucklehead had his guns stolen overnight out of his unlocked car (ignore that brilliance for this moment).The police had recovered the handguns, but the "assault rifle" was still missing. I couldn't help but wonder if they meant "AR" as in ARmalite-type rifle?

Nah, they meant Assault Rifle. Sounds more dramatic.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from dalebob61 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I read this column daily. I enjoy the stuff you and PB write about and occaisionally we get pure gold. That's what today was Mr Petzal. Thanks for great insight and honest writing. I will be forwarding this link to a lot of my friends today.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from NHshtr wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Today, "journalism" means "tell people what you want them to believe". It's that simple.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

no, no, no... people only want to hear what they want to hear from the people they want to hear it from. We can't be bothered with "thinking."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

“Since 1934, only one legally owned machine gun has been used in a crime of murder, and a law enforcement officer committed that crime.”
-The History Channel, Modern Marvels, Weapons at War: The Machine Gun

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mjenkins1 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I don't know (although I could take a good guess) as to what made you go on this "rant" today Mr Petzal, but I wish it would happen more often because reading this nearly made my day.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

"Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets."

"Advice to young writers who want to get ahead without annoying delays: don’t write about Man, write about 'a' man."

"No tears in the writer, no tears in the reader. No surprise in the writer, no surprise in the reader."

"Special-interest publications should realize that if they are attracting enough advertising and readers to make a profit, the interest is not so special."

"Fiction is the truth inside the lie."

-AUTHOR UNKNOWN

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from freeparking wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Not curious about factual gun information, not curious about the Gunwalker scandal, which is really disturbing.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tony Berg wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Good column Mr. Petzal.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

buckhunter LaPierre's comment about ATF being Jack Booted Thugs wasn't the only one.

“a jack-booted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today.”
-Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) in 1983, describing the ATF

“a jack-booted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today.”
-Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) in 1983, describing the ATF

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

MOOSED DAT ONE UP!

“I took an oath. And the thing that I find totally abhorrent and disgusting is these higher-level people took that same oath and they violate the basic principles and tenets of the Constitution and the laws and simple ethics and morality.”
-Lou Tomasello, ATF agent, to Mike Wallace, on 60 Minutes, 1993-Jan

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from dickgun wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Clay,
I wrote my comment before I saw yours with the John Dingell reference. That's the one. Thanks for naming the source. I have it somewhere but not in memory.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from focusfront wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Good post, Dave, by the way. I don't know what to do about media bias either. If you have any suggestions (other than all of us on this post joining the NRA, which I'm sure we are all smart enough to have done long ago), let's hear them. Meanwhile, keep punching out pieces like these, buddy.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

actually, they still get it wrong when it comes to men in uniform. just recently during the issue reporting on Bin Laden's death, TIME was chastised by readers for referring to SEALs as "soldiers". Of course, being from the Navy, they should be called sailors. Or should they? I'm not so sure anymore.

It's not just the liberal media. Even in shows where you'd expect them to get it right, they still get it wrong. Even "former SEAL" Richard "Mack" Machowicz sometimes interchanges "bullet" with "cartridge". And the TV series "Top Shot" commits this sin repeatedly.

I suppose these hosts (even Mack) just rely on their "scriptwriters" completely, not bothering to insert their corrections or override the "script". Or maybe I'm just giving them too much credit.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bernie wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great post, Dave! Another favorite of know-nothing journalists is to describe shot pellets as "buck shot."

I have worked with biologists, engineers, law enforcement officers, Marines, and god-knows-who else, but I never witnessed a profession as profoundly ignorant about firearms as those in the journalism field. My first job out of college was as a reporter/columnist for a midwestern newspaper. Out of 26 editorial workers, including myself, one guy was a duck hunter, one sports reporter shot a whitetail doe in Minnesota one time. And there was me. The rest were some blend of anti-hunter/anti-gunner, and knew nothing about firearms. And this was more than 35 years ago! I cannot imagine how things would be today on a big city daily. I think the answer is that most journalists come from liberal, and often urban backgrounds,where firearms are an enigma. I should also mention that in one of my columns I stated that the average journalist didn't know a shotgun from a broomstick, but usually was an ardent supporter of gun control. The new managing editor, an import from the Miami Herald, dropped my column.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from guncrazy74 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

P.S. I love the show and you guys are doing a great job!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Well, at least a dozen above have expressed my very opinion of the libtard media circus that aboutnds.

Consider this: If they can't get simple things right about a simple subject whose info abounds on the internet and printed word, HTH can we trust them to get ANYTHING right?

I have been involved in more than a few newsworthy events in my 60+ years on the planet and without exception the media reports were inaccurate and downright misleading in each and every one. But we can all trust the Capon in Chief 'cause MSNBC sex so, huh?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from fliphuntr14 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I like to have a laugh at anybody that likes to claim that their major "news" network is right and the other is wrong. What fools they must be. haha shane +1 it seems a few missed your comment, great article Mr. Petzal

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Del in KS wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The libs surely know gun control won't stop crime. It is my opinion they want to disarm the American public for a more sinister reason. If they try to take over the country how would an unarmed populace stop them? It can't happen here you say? The more history I read and watch on Mil History channel the more I know it very well could happen here. Folks should read the details of how Hitler came to power. A lot of that situation parallels the problems we have today. We must be vigilant. If you aren't an NRA member you should be.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from nc30-06 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

This article, which is so true and well written, reminds me of another topic that the news media screws up by not checking the facts and just being blissfully ignorant. That being anything related to aviation. An observation I and many others have made about the general public is that when a person steps onto an airport, they immediately drop 60 points of their respective IQ. Same with gun haters or non shooters. Bring up the topic of guns and they start drooling and get glassy-eyed in their effort to display their ignorance.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom warner wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

A super blog Dave! I wish that it could be more widely read. Nothing that I could say would improve upon the comments already made by the rest of you. I find it particularly encouraging to know that there are so many knowledgeable, articulate and bright people among us, and I enjoy seeing it proven over and over. The observation that most news reports in which the reader was present or personally involved bear scant resemblance to what actually took place is right on the money! I know this from experience. Our history has proven over and over that the media is terribly flawed, but I do not know what can be done about it. It used to be even worse than now. We cannot remain a republic without a independent media. I sometimes think that human beings are basically fools and we know that there is no cure for stupidity. History keeps proving me right. So, is there any hope?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from kansasjeff wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The worst selling diet book of all time: lose weight by eating less and exercising more. The worst headline in news: gun works as expected. The media only gets people to buy if they release lurid headlines. Personally I’m fine with a certain amount of gun control. ( I’m ok with waiting a few days to be sure the guy in front of me isn’t the next Pablo Escobar and the guy behind me isn’t the next Charlie Manson.) But the media never reports the story of us regular guys just the extreme elements on both sides. I think the guy who wrote "freakanomics" showed that a pool in your backyard was 100 times more likely to kill a child than a gun in the home. And here is the link to actually prove my statment
( take note journalism majors)
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2001/07/levittpoolsvsguns.php

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

DEP's post is a very well composed compilation of information that most of us have noticed over the years. Rather than simply verbalize a comment and create a frown like most of us, DEP wrote a sensible and truthful post. That article in addition to those added by others leaves me somewhat wordless other than to say to all of you, well put.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark-1 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Excellent rant, DP. Next to "Fast and Furious" scandal I believe the upcoming story will be how NICS system is being abused by PC states. The oversight and liblity is shockingly absent.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntenthusiest wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

National Geographic recently aired a story of a major bank heist that occurred back in 1976. In it, they showed some of the weapons used that included Glock pistols. In 1976?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom warner wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

To SL: You of course are mostly correct in your comment regarding the sold-out media, but on the other hand, much of what we commonly refer to as "alternate" media is in fact sort of independent, such as Field & Stream Magazine and many others. While they all promote a certain point of view, most do so without telling blatant lies, and I would think could be thought of as part of a free press. So, I guess that is what I meant, maybe poorly expressed.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappadave wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I knew that something had gone wrong with "journalism" the moment I discovered that 85%+ of "journalism" students at our universities say they majored in journalism because they, "want to make a difference," instead of insure that the public is accurately informed. These useful idiots have been convinced--likely by their instructors in the public schools or the university of their choice--that pushing THEIR political philosophy is a proper function of "journalists."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from wingshooter54 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

The moral responsibility previously adhered to by the national media began to decay with Dan Rather's baseless and unverified allegations against George Bush. His actions cost him his job; today it would not. Such a travesty would never have occurred on Walter Cronkite's watch. News media today is not about the news and objective, truthful reporting....it is about entertainment, ratings, and advertising; truth in reporting is not a consideration. The members of "The Five"-Fox's new round table discussion show, are instructed to joke and pick at each other throughout the show. A funny guy, a serious guy, two smoking hot babes, and ultra liberal (The NRA thinks everyone should own a machine gun and an army tank) Bob Beckell; buffoon, loudmouth, and complete idiot. So who talks the most? Beckell, the mountain of misinformation.("Why even have a debt ceiling?) This is the level of decay the former esteemed Fourth Estate has fallen to. Does the NRA get equal time to refute the "machine gun & army tank" claim? No, and even if they did, the damage is already done....I'am a hunter, shooter, gun collector, retired Journalism, English, and Photography teacher and NRA LIFE MEMBER! Liberals say I'm dangerous.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

It's not the media's job to accurately report the truth from an objective standpoint. Their job is to make headlines, sound bites and Emmy-nominated stories that sell copy, improve Nielsen ratings, and interest advertisers. I firmly believe that they are as honest as they have to be, by threat of discovery and loss of creditability, or when being so supports their initial aims. Any appearance of anything otherwise is just an illusion.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from WesMcCormick wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

In November of 2012 when you prepare to cast your ballot, I want everyone to think of this piece here and cast your vote as such

(X) Petzal, David E. -Party Affiliation- American

Keep em coming Dave

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from MReeder wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

DP,
I am afraid you are too kind by half when it comes to what most reporters know and don't know. In fact, it has been my experience that they know as little about the military and economics as they do about guns, which is to say, when it comes to at least 99-percent of them, absolutely nothing.
I base than on about 30-years spent laboring in various media, including print, radio and television. While working near Fort Sill I had to constantly soothe the offended sensibilities of folks at Fort Sill, when despite my constant upbraiding (I was a news anchor/senior producer) reporters insisted on calling the post a base.
When it comes to matters of finance and economics, I believe I met over the course of those three decades maybe half a dozen reporters, at most, who could differentiate between Adam Smith and Will Smith and fewer than that who grasped the profit motive.
As for guns, I worked with one photographer from Marlin, Texas with a working knowledge of firearms. None of the others knew the difference between a semi-auto or an auto, a pistol or a revolver, or a shotgun or a rifle for that matter. None I knew had ever owned a gun and with only one or two exceptions none had ever fired a gun. They certainly had no idea how guns worked or possessed the faintest knowledge of ballistics. None of this kept them from opining on the subject, of course, since they viewed actual knowledge as nothing more than a flimsy impediment to their opinions.
I did what little I could do, including a feature at the local gun club demonstrating the difference between semi-autos and full autos during the great "assault gun" debate, initiated as many stories as I could manage that put hunting in an admirable light and headed off a couple of nonsensical stories based on bullet performances that would have given new meaning to the term "magic bullet."
I think the reason for this abysmal state lies in the chosen field. People of more conservative and/or practical outlook and nature tend to gravitate toward red-blooded American activities like business, engineering, construction and finance, while those of a more liberal, theoretical outlook go to law and journalism school, where Beelzebub and his minions, posing as college professors, wait eagerly, rubbing their hands together and drooling with anticipation at the idea of filling their new victims' empty heads with contempt for the entire span of western civilization.
As to what one can do, all I can suggest is to write or call the offending paper, radio or television station whenever it disseminates something especially idiotic, and raise polite but holy Hell.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from hengst wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Nice piece of journalism! You stated a point and backed it up with solid evidence. If more "journalists used this approach we wouldn't have this problem.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from tdhoneycutt wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I was a journalist for 15 years, and I discovered that some journalists are biased, closed-minded folk who really are intellectually lazy. Beware those like that who become editors and news assignment editors, because the biases and closed-mindedness will be magnified.
Favorite politics related piece: John Kerry, running for president, showed up to hunt pheasants with a shotgun. New York Times photo caption identified the firearm as a rifle.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Clay, in Russia, as well as Europe, an Elg, or Eich, or some such variation of "elk" IS a moose, as per N. American usage.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Sorry Clay, I meant Elch. That's the German.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dougded wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Ms Maddow is neither smart not knowledgable. She is a reader with an agenda. Like almost all media types, she pursues her agenda so she will be accepted by her peers. They don't know why they hate guns, but it is the thing they are suppose to do. The media has foresaken it's Constitutional duty to be a free press and inform the electorate. In a sentence.... The media should be taken out and tarred and feathered at the same time the politicians are. We need neither in their current form.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tc505 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

something that ticks me off to no end is every time the news comes on there is a shooting and the picture is always of an ak47!! these people have no clue on any of what they are supposed to be reporting about and the pictures never match. recently a man walked into an office and he shot several rounds with a semi-auto pistol and the picture was of a revolver. another used an ar15 but the ever loving ak47 picture was right up there describing the weapon he used. nuts!!!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jason Hart wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great piece, and truly shows how low we have sunk when we listen to journalists such as Ms. Maddow and others.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dickgun wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great post, Dave,
Re: Wayne LaPierre and the comment using the words "jack booted thugs."
Many people do not know that it was the esteemed Congressman from Michigan, (DEMOCRAT) John Dingell, that first used those words in public in describing Govt employees. Wonder why THAT never shows up in public comment.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Bruce Willis (as John McClane) refers to the MP5 (nice weapon) as a "machinegun" in the original "Die Hard", when he scribes a message on a bad guy's dead body in the elevator. It really is a submachinegun, probably the best of its kind, or a machine carbine, or machine pistol, but Hollywood and most folks don't sweat the difference. If it fires full auto, they immmediately think "machinegun!".

Of course, there's the case of the "sniper rifle".

And there's always this scene in a Hollywood movie or TV show, where someone always shouts "look, he's got a gun!" whenever someone (even a good guy) pulls a gun, always causing panic in a crowd.

Regarding assault weapons, the term assault rifle was the result of Hitler's propaganda anyway. He changed MP-43/MP-44 (machine pistol or "submachinegun") to "StG-44" or "storm rifle" (which became assault rifle in common English usage) to heighten its terror impact on enemies, just like the vengeance weapons V-1 and V-2, and to indicate that a new class of weapon was born (true, to a point). The MP-44/StG-44 was indeed the first widely deployed assault rifle, but it wasn't the first.

When Fedorov invented the first true assault rifle in 1916(!), he simply named it Avtomat. Imagine if the Russians managed to manufacture that thing in large numbers? They would have mowed down the Germans during Operation Barbarossa, and Marilyn Monroe would have had to come up with a different word in "Diamonds Are A Girl's Bestfriend" (bad joke, sorry).

Hitler's propaganda campaign must have succeeded, because now, any autoloader with more than 10-round capacity, a pistol grip and bayonet lug, even though it fires semiautomatic, is considered an assault weapon.

If Miyamoto Musashi were alive, he'd tell you his sword, whether wooden or steel (he had killed people with both types) was an assault weapon. If Bruce Lee were alive, he'd tell you his nunchakus were assault weapons. Heck, every bit of Bruce was an assault weapon. But I think I'd better stop there, lest the people at CNN start a campaign banning martial arts, chopsticks and kitchen knives.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from scratchgolf72 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

good article dave...rachel maddow is truly one dimly lit bulb.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from GregMc wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave,

Seriously though, do you have a link to the Times story you mentioned? I'm sure you have it and I really want to read that story.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from davidpetzal wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

To Greg Mc: No, I didn't save it. I wrote a letter to the editor about it and let the piece go. The only thing I can tell you is that it ran sometime this spring, I think in April. The Times makes so many mistakes that it doesn't pay to save them unless they're really horrendous.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from firedog11 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great comments Dave. A couple of points one of which is the educational system which in my county (Loudoun County Va)holds up people like Che as a shining example of Hispanic heritage month. The second is that local groups need to form, in Va it is the Va Citizens Defense League, to defend your rights on the local and state level. Last but not least have you noticed how lame street media has a positive opinion of the rioters and flash mobs running wild in London, Philly and Washington DC. ( Black youth groups have been assaulting tourists down on the mall). It is always because they have no jobs or new x boxes to play with. And it is always the fault of the someone else because these yahoos don't get what they want when they snap their fingers. Last Maddow and Chris Matthews are idiots.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Great article dave, I just loaded to to about 1500 people in Facebook, I am sure they will load it to their list of people because the ones on my list are NOT Libtards!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from James Miller wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Mr. Petzel, thanks for that excellent piece of writing. The media is not interested in truth. It is interested in changing society to its perversion of truth. To do this they employ the tactic of repeating lies over and over until the public is numb, and starts to see the lie as being the truth. It's taken 60 years of this to get us to where we are today.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Wingshooter beat me to it. Work-related Rantus interruptus.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ruckweiler wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Maddow and her ilk are educated? In what, underwater basket-weaving? Their illogic, lack of reasoning, and, as the author mentioned, lack of inquiry, doesn't much describe a thinking animal. This is what passes, I suppose, for intellectualism in their circle.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Sorry if I offended anyone at F&S geez, now your being PC, but google Rachel Maddow and draw your own conclusion.
Shame on you for double standards.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from chaslee wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave, It is refreshing to hear you espouse what us bums have been saying and have known for years, which some idiots can't figure out, other than us bums that pay our bills, work our butts off, send a couple days at a hunting camp or at the range. I hope they shoot their eye out with a BB gun.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Maybe Rachael Maddow's partner Susan believes all the BS she spews. I can't watch that crap. Too bad she has a Black Labrador held captive who will never get a chance to do what he was created to do .... hunt!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from MJC wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

This will probably become one of this site's most linked to articles.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from DaleM wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

GREAT piece of writing Mr. P!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gerald Keller wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I enjoyed this article! Particularly the "magazine" and "clip" mistake they all make. I will not say what I think about students of journalism, but from how most cover guns and gun topics - they didn't learn anything about being knowlegeable, as your article points out. Thanks!
PS: Remember all you reporters out there, a clip goes in a Garand rifle, and magazines insert into most modern semi automatic pistols, into the handle.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Carl Huber wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Dave your all wet. The TRUTH and COMMON SENSE never sold and never will and it only appeals to a very small audience. My dad was a contractor who worked for a hard drinking, law & order Irish catholic news paper guy. Back in the 60's he was vehemently anti police and pro-liberal. Knowing Mr. Breslins true leanings. My dad asked "why Mr Breslin". His reply "Karl the worst contempt for people in my profession is silent contempt". True story!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from tmbryant wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Look what gun control is doing for Great Britain right now with rioting, looting and burning. If store owners could defend their businesses and the police themselves could carry firearms, they would be a lot better off in controlling the rioters. But, when the gangs no that they wont' be shot when breaking in to these businesses and that the police normally have no weapons, what's to deter them? Their basic humanity?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Watching "Wild Russia" the other night, they were calling Moose "ELK", NO LIE!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Elk has always been given to the biggest deer of any area. In India, for example, the sambar deer is considered "the elk".

I think when the Europeans came to North America and first encountered the WAPITI, they thought it was the biggest deer and called it elk. Then they moved further north and saw and even bigger deer (and the true cousin of the European Elk), and having already given "elk" to someone, decided to call it moose.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dbarry wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Excellent piece Dave. FocusFront: +1 right on the money. So much "journalism" today is so biased, I cant stand to read or listen to it.

My son has a cool t-shirt that has an outline of a big gun the word ABORTION, and the words: "wonder what they'd say if they used guns..." Probably makes a couple of them (liberals) scratch their heads! Naaaaah.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from scratchgolf72 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

i doubt that the media even cares what they know about guns, as long as they can put them into a bad light they are fine with the garbage they spew out to the uneducated american people who believe it.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from fishrmn100 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Give me the truth and then show me the proof. I don't go for hearsay.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from etexan wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

There was a time when news was dispensed by radio and newspapers and even TV for a while to inform the people about what was going on in our society. Even protected by the Constitution. Entities have discovered they can influence how we think and vote by reporting what/how they want to so that now, none of those entities may be reliable. We have a representative government who represents themselves and others who conspire to have laws enacted to enhance the rich and powerful (who really need no more). And we keep electing them. Our type of government depends on us to make good choices or at least cast out those who don't do a good job.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from CL3 wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

wingshooter54:

I like your comment (minus the Perry endorsement for now, too early for me). Scary thought about the freeloaders.

And, if you don't vote, you are disrespecting every single person who has died for this country. It doesn't matter who you vote for, JUST DO IT!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bellringer wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

To amzbrady - SAY WHAT? You are undoubtedly the biggest sxxxhead ever to post on this blog or else a troll as your name would possibly suggest. What do you base you assumption on, the name National RIFLE Association. You need to learn about things before you speak.

Remember the old adage, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt".

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from alohabobby wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Well, you can include yourself in that dissembling media gang. Practice what you preach.

"Ballistic footprint" is a commonly used term and shows countless returns on Google and other search engines. Whether it is fitting to use it regarding a bullet rather than a guided missile is another issue. But it is a common term in - surprise - ballistics.

As to the Smith & Wesson accidentally discharging, you say "Even if the revolver was cocked, it’s highly unlikely that it could fire." "Highly unlikely" is quite a bit different than "impossible." You sort of shot yourself in the foot (no pun intended) on that one. Regardless, I'll take the officer's word on it.

Rachel Maddow is not in any sense of the word a reporter. She's a commentarist. She will be no more or less accurate in her polemics than Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from square_peg wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Rachel Maddow is a smart woman about many things but I can't stand to listen to her when she starts going on about gun control. She's a good example of how an otherwise intelligent person can have some wildly idealistic and crazy notions.

We're seeing a lot of this these days from both extremes of the political spectrum.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from oldshooter wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Here I am reading this rant by a guy my age and with whom I served in the same war. Where are all the young bucks that should be writing these articles? Let Petzal
retire. But wait, there would not be any of these observations, for the very reasons stated. Keep up the good work, Mr. Petzal, you continue telling it like it is and I'll read it. (By the way, like your segments on the tv show. Can you get more on rifles, and less on those silly guns posing as rifles?)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

WAM,
Wow you got away with saying that and I got slammed because I thought she was mad that her girlfried licked her the wrong way!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from GregMc wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Hey Dave,

How about a link to the recent Times story you refer to?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappadave wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I knew that something had gone wrong with "journalism" the moment I discovered that 85%+ of "journalism" students at our universities say they majored in journalism because they, "want to make a difference," instead of insure that the public is accurately informed. These useful idiots have been convinced--likely by their instructors in the public schools or the university of their choice--that pushing THEIR political philosophy is a proper function of "journalists."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pappadave wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

I knew that something had gone wrong with "journalism" the moment I discovered that 85%+ of "journalism" students at our universities say they majored in journalism because they, "want to make a difference," instead of insure that the public is accurately informed. These useful idiots have been convinced--likely by their instructors in the public schools or the university of their choice--that pushing THEIR political philosophy is a proper function of "journalists."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

What's even worse, I've talked to Veteran Law Enforcement Officers, Military etc and they say the most outrages statements that defy the laws of physics!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Jim in Mo, Here is wikipedia's take om "IT" Maddow!!!!!!!!! About 90% accurate! JMNSVHO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Maddow

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Joes_4570 wrote 2 years 34 weeks ago

They can't outlaw guns cause they wouldn't have room to keep all the "outlaws" that would keep them anyways

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from bluegraytx wrote 2 years 32 weeks ago

The kids were watching Diehard 2 (the airport) the other night while I was attempting to read an article. About halfway into the movie Bruce Willis commented that the bad guys were carrying Glocks with glass barrels that could get past security. Perhaps this is where the rumor gained credence. I believe the movie was relased ca. 1998.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ILBassin wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

i agree with everything u said dave except the fact about the drug cartels having these unlimited budgets that they don't need the "straw men" to purchase the firearms for them.I read an article in USA Today that man was just arrested in arizona for purchasing firearms and supplying them to the cartels. he purchased 720 guns in total.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Oryx wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

Pretty low-road comment Jim. Is that what you were going for?

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from amzbrady@aol.com wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

We need to get rid of the NRA (National Rifle Association) and get the NFA (National Firearm Association) established. The NRA does not support all facets of the 2nd ammendment. They really dont do much for Pistol owners.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Nyflyangler wrote 2 years 35 weeks ago

So what? That the media usually screw up the details when they write about technical subjects has never been a surprise. This is non-news.

Just more of Petzal's usual pedantic hysterical writing. Demonstrating he's just yet another journalist who elevates his opinion to the level of fact and assigning nefarious motives to others ignorance. Not a dime's woth of difference between them and him.

Maybe F&S should change his name to Putzal for accuracies sake.

-6 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

bmxbiz-fs