TexasCHLforum.com

These three stories appeared as the top 3 articles on Yahoo's front page today:
• Police hunt for gunman who killed 11 in German school shooting - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_ ... ool_attack" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
• Gunman kills 9 and himself in Ala. shooting spree - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_ ... _shootings" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
• Man accused of shooting Ill. pastor had arsenal of guns at home - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_ ... h_shooting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Particularly interesting, the article about the Alabama shooting couldn't site how old the man was, or whether one of his victims was his grandmother or great aunt. But, they did know for sure that he used an 'automatic weapon'.

And, the Illinois man who killed the pastor had an 'arsenal of guns' at home that consisted of 2 shotguns, a rifle, and 550 .22 rounds. Wow, someone needs to better define arsenal.

In no way am I suggesting what these crazy people did was OK. Just pointing out, again, that the media hates guns and it only serves to make people think all guns are bad.

Don't forget we had one Tuesday in Gonzales, Texas as well...

I think it was the current moon-phase that brought this on yesterday...

Don't you realize how boring it would be without added drama and sensationalism, that's what the media is for; make bad, worse, make good, well, bad.

-Cain

fredtubbs wrote:And, the Illinois man who killed the pastor had an 'arsenal of guns' at home that consisted of 2 shotguns, a rifle, and 550 .22 rounds. Wow, someone needs to better define arsenal.

Yeah, I saw this too. Sensationalism.

fredtubbs wrote: Wow, someone needs to better define arsenal.

Yep...

I had time to waste, so I wrote a quick email to the AP and asked what their criteria(or definition) was to be called an arsenal. I don't expect a response though.

I also said that calling a couple shotguns, a rifle and a little more than a brick(which I defined for them, since they probably don't know what that means) of .22 ammo an arsenal is a stretch.

-Cain

CainA wrote:

fredtubbs wrote: Wow, someone needs to better define arsenal.

Yep...

I had time to waste, so I wrote a quick email to the AP and asked what their criteria(or definition) was to be called an arsenal. I don't expect a response though.

I also said that calling a couple shotguns, a rifle and a little more than a brick(which I defined for them, since they probably don't know what that means) of .22 ammo an arsenal is a stretch.

-Cain

I guess loosely defined it is:

Arsenal
–noun
1. a place of storage or a magazine containing arms and military equipment for land or naval service.
2. a government establishment where military equipment or munitions are manufactured.
3. a collection or supply of weapons or munitions.
4. a collection or supply of anything; store: He came to the meeting with an impressive arsenal of new research data.

But, for the media it is more of an attention grabber than 'He had a couple of other guns, too'

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_ ... gun_laws_1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Boy, this didn't take very long...

Brilliant...

We should take notes...

/sarcasm

fredtubbs wrote: And, the Illinois man who killed the pastor had an 'arsenal of guns' at home that consisted of 2 shotguns, a rifle, and 550 .22 rounds. Wow, someone needs to better define arsenal.

.

OOOOOhhhh noooooo
I have at least 3 arsonals then & some of you guys have more arsonals than that.

You guys knock the press, but who else will do the job? Would you prefer the government run the media? How about the bloggers? The press does pretty good on the whole, considering it is privately funded and self supporting. Accept a little imperfection. Maybe a lot of imperfection. Learn to read between the lines for the facts. And for those who get most of their news online, you get what you pay for.

stevie_d_64 wrote:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_ ... gun_laws_1

Boy, this didn't take very long...

Brilliant...

We should take notes...

/sarcasm

And whats funny is they think these actually make a diffrence to the shooters. germany increased the age from 18 to 21 but even if they hadnt the shooter still should not have had the firearm since he was only 17. Gotta love common sense gun laws.

casingpoint wrote:You guys knock the press, but who else will do the job? Would you prefer the government run the media? How about the bloggers? The press does pretty good on the whole, considering it is privately funded and self supporting. Accept a little imperfection. Maybe a lot of imperfection. Learn to read between the lines for the facts. And for those who get most of their news online, you get what you pay for.

The press can do the job... they just need to do a much better job and with a LOT less opinion crafted as fact.

And, for those who get their news from CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, etc. etc... you get garbage. I would argue that getting your news online is better.

fredtubbs wrote: And, for those who get their news from CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, etc. etc... you get garbage. I would argue that getting your news online is better.

The only reason Online knews is a little better is that you can filter it better. The sources are typically the same old culprits.

casingpoint wrote:You guys knock the press, but who else will do the job?

You have the right to complain if there's a cockroach in your french fries. Even at KFC.

casingpoint wrote:How about the bloggers?

They get the facts right more often than the MSM.

those who get their news from CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, New York Times, Washington Post

LOL, three of those are some of my primary online sources.

Ok question.!? What do u guys think the media would do if an armed citizen would have intervened in any of those situations?? Do you guys believe that they might do some responsible reporting??