IS BALANCED REPORTING “TOO MUCH TO ASK?”
(Jan. 10, 2014) — [Editor’s Note: The following post was written on Thursday, January 9, 2014.]
Today marks the third anniversary of the Tucson shooting, but it didn’t take long for gun control advocates to start calling for more laws to grab our guns and the media was just happy to oblige them by giving them coverage. Sure, some of their stories talked about the victims of the shooting, but you have to have to hand it to the liberal media, they gave airtime to the gun grabbers and certainly had no problem letting them have their say.
One local news station 3TV aired the comments of one of the survivors Patricia Maisch who had this to say about the anniversary.
“Every time [NRA official] Wayne LaPierre opens his mouth, their true colors shine. It’s the color of money with blood red fingerprints on it. We can protect the Second Amendment, and still keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people,” Maisch sad.
Maisch sounds just like the other gun grabbers who often attack the NRA which had nothing to do with the shooting. When Jarred Loughner shot those people it wasn’t the act of a responsible gun owner. It was a person that had an obvious mental health issue and the gun was the tool used in the incident. And that’s what a gun is, a tool. However, gun control advocates would rather blame the tool than the person pulling the trigger. Tell us Ms. Maisch, how do you propose taking the guns out of so-called dangerous people without infringing on the Second Amendment rights of others? And whom do you consider dangerous people? Right now, the gun control advocates might as well be on the side of the criminals because they call for stricter gun laws which work to take guns away from responsible gun owners and give the bad guys the edge.
The old (what I would call mainstream media) media is the biggest offender to the Second Amendment with their one sided stories about it and guns. Often their stories are filled with the words from gun control advocates but not from the other side which state that having a gun and knowing how to use it can save your life. That is a fact the media doesn’t want their audiences to hear or see. It seems pretty apparent that the media will demonize responsible gun owners to such a degree that they won’t be happy unless they’re taken away in handcuffs when they use a gun to protect themselves and their loved ones.
Last week’s shooting at Arrowhead Town Centre where a former Marine used a gun to protect his wife and a security officer from being shot by two shoplifting suspects (they pulled a gun on them) has made headlines. But despite Glendale police stating that the man acted within the law and that his actions were appropriate, the media didn’t seem satisfied with the answer. Yes, the news stations did go on social media and ask their audiences if they think the police department should charge the man for using his gun. It’s apparent the media wants this to keep the story going and to have something to talk about. Yes, news is a ratings game but it’s the same negative news on every channel. When it comes to shootings the media will cover it from almost every angle but one, the responsible gun owner’s.
The worst side of the media is making folk heroes out of criminals. This seems to be another side to the shootings I’m seeing all too often with news stories these days. If a crazed loon stabs or shoots someone and they die, the news media seems to create a twisted reality show out of the whole ordeal. Worst yet it isn’t the person that caused the ordeal, it was the weapon. At least that’s what the liberal left and gun grabbers want you to believe. And how about Gabrielle Giffords. At one time she was supposedly all for guns and now she along with her husband Mark Kelly are now trying to restrict the Second Amendment rights of others and have joined on the crusade to have them banned. Or is it simply Mark Kelly trying to use the situation of his wife being shot (and now recovery) to keep his name in the media and further his agenda as some conservative blogs and media has suggested?
I think it’s time those who believe in sticking up for the Second Amendment and an individual’s right to carry a gun to call the media out on its one sided coverage. It isn’t balanced if only one side gets to air their voice. I’ve heard members of the media state that they want to get both sides but often they fail to do so. When it comes to guns they apparently have already decided to be one sided and the liberal left is obviously grateful that it’s their voice people hear. How about letting the voice of the independents who actually dare to think for themselves and are for the Second Amendment and believe it’s the right of every individual to decide for themselves whether or not a person carries a gun to be heard? Apparently, that’s too much to ask of the media.
The “Straight Skinny”, aka the “Bottom Line”, is that you, and you alone, are responsible for your own safety.
Our so-called “justice system” is nothing but a sham for a revolving door billion-dollar cash cow that allows criminals to be coddled as infants. To top it off, it seems that the courts are obviously ill-equipped to deal with the concept of “justice”, for if it were so, we wouldn’t have convicted sex offenders/pedophiles living among us, now would we? The “Red Star” on maps, maybe next door.
Nothing but a revolving door, our “justice”. Heck, even an illegal immigrant with a DUI gets to walk, even with vehicular homicide, because our Federal Law enforcement is unable, unwilling or ordered not to lift a finger and look the other way when confronted with the beyond obvious: an “illegal” is an “illegal” by any other name.
So…buy a gun and protect yourself. PERIOD. There is no protection system yet known to top “self preservation”. Law enforcement is “reactionary”, in other words, they only respond “after-the-fact”.
In my 2012 Presidential Platform any woman seeking a driver’s license must show a loaded gun in her purse: no gun, no license.
Now how simple can I make it?
OPOVV