"Shoot to Kill Law"...... Sheeeeesssshhhh

[mr surveyor]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am getting tired of our little local news affiliates making idiotic statements like "the so-called Castle Doctrine, better known as the Shoot to Kill law...."

I have emailed our local nbc affiliate several times requesting that the so-called reporters actually READ the text of the Castle Doctrine and then explain how the use of deadly force now takes on a more deadly nature than before the legislation.

Other media sources have refered to the Castle Doctrine as the "Shoot First, Ask Questions Later law". This is really getting old now! If our local area t.v. affiliates had email boxes that were actually available for comment, they would be full. I've been sending my comments to their "hot tip" email box. Whatever. The one source I had considered the last of the dependable locals in the Tyler/Longview area KETK NBC 56 has reached the end of the line for me!

[phddan]

Most media is agenda driven.
No more professional ethics involved.
Sad state of affairs.

Dan

[135boomer]

That kind of garbage is pretty sad. Remember, accuracy is not a concern of the news media.

[HighVelocity]

Complain all you want to the media. Nobody is listening. The producers of the news programs that stream into our homes (there is an off switch), as well as newspaper editors, take "literary license" to the extreme. They (the MSM), don't care about accuracy. They only care that it sounds evil and will boost their ratings so they can sell commercial air time/print ads to advertisers that want us to Super Size it!



Sheep don't have opposing thumbs, thus they cannot shoot the wolves that eat them.

[seamusTX]

Don't forget "shoot the Avon lady."

I prefer "stand your ground." Texas has had castle doctrine for decades. That means you can defend your home against intruders.

- Jim

[stevie_d_64]

Well fiddlesticks, look at it this way folks...

Its the law now...We understand the real definition and meaning of that law...

They do not, or do not wish to portray it in the correct way...So I say forget them (media), they are stupid...Plain and simple...

If they had been smart, they'd have put up more of a fight during the regular session this year...But they failed...We won...

The "I Hate the Media" club is beginning to grow...Right Charles???

[seamusTX]

Unfortunately, ignoring a problem does not make it go away.

If no one watched TV or bought newspapers, they would go out of existence. Millions of people do watch and buy them, and believe what they hear and read.

We have to respond somehow. Write a letter to the editor. Call the station (don't bother with e-mail).

- Jim

[KD5NRH]

If you want it to be more effective, send letters to their advertisers and cc the station and NBC's stockholder relations address. Preferably, try to find at least a few advertisers that are likely to be pro-gun. When you start hurting their cashflow, they'll listen.

[shootthesheet]

If you want it to be more effective, send letters to their advertisers and cc the station and NBC's stockholder relations address. Preferably, try to find at least a few advertisers that are likely to be pro-gun. When you start hurting their cashflow, they'll listen.

I agree. Go after the money.

[austin]

Call them the pro-crime TV and news outlets. Thats what they are.

[Mage34]

Remember when no news was good news....now I just wish they would put at least one good news piece on the air......

[pbandjelly]

We (as a group) should sponsor a Public Service Announcement to run around 5 or 6pm.
'splaining the Castle Doctrine, things like that. be too expensive, though, to go into real detail. ah, well.
maybe one of us'll win the lottery.


oh, wait, our types don't go into gas stations to buy Lotto tickets!

[NcongruNt]

Complain all you want to the media. Nobody is listening. The producers of the news programs that stream into our homes (there is an off switch), as well as newspaper editors, take "literary license" to the extreme. They (the MSM), don't care about accuracy. They only care that it sounds evil and will boost their ratings so they can sell commercial air time/print ads to advertisers that want us to Super Size it!



Sheep don't have opposing thumbs, thus they cannot shoot the wolves that eat them.

Yeah, I haven't owned a TV for years now. There's very little worth watching. I also don't listen to the radio either, for similar reasons. Both of these industries are in a state of decline, as they become more corporate and purely profits-driven to the detriment of the content that pulls viewers and listeners.

Radio, for example has had a much more rapid decline in popularity with the advent of the CD and digital technology that allows for the portable listening of music free of commercials. File-sharing networks soon followed, as the music industry attempted to tighten its stranglehold on a once-captive market, The music industry has endeavored to keep and inflate prices for the purchase of music media, despite the declining costs involved in actually producing and distributing that physical media. The result has been a consumer and artist revolution of sorts, where consumers in increasing numbers no longer buy their music from the mainstream music production companies, and new artists are refusing to be exploited and producing their own music for direct distribution (sometimes free-of-charge) to what they find is a dedicated fan base. The result is a music and radio industry in violent death throes, unwilling to change to meet market demand and blaming its own listeners for its irresponsible lack of innovation and service. It has responded to movements by independent internet radio stations who provide commercial-free content by slapping prohibitive and retroactive royalty fees, stifling the innovation that could possible be turned into a promising new industry.

The TV and movie industry is approaching a similar fate. While technological advances have only more recently stirred up this industry, the symptoms are the same. The television industry has increased the share of airtime given to commercials dramatically, to the point where it is impossible to rerun older shows without cutting bits of scenes and speeding up the video in portions. Try watching an old Star Trek rerun on commercial TV and you'll find it obvious that bits of the show have been cut out and the fight scenes seem to be fast-forwarded as if they were in an old silent film. The ends of scenes suddenly cut off as the station goes to a commercial. Great numbers of people are refusing to deal with the bombardment of ads, and along came the TiVO and ReplayTV, among others. What was this industry's response? Sue the companies that make those devices instead of recognize the demands of their own consumers and adjust the way they do business accordingly. The TV industry doesn't care about its viewers. They are seen as static capital, and anyone refusing to do business on their terms are deemed as criminal.

My point in all this in relation to this thread, is that a commercial TV station is not going to care about what we think. They may temporarily bow to pressures from its viewers, but only in extraordinary numbers, and even then the industry itself will not change. Even as late as the 80s, it was normal for people to sit down and watch the news at night. It was a given in the industry that there were X amount of viewers and the only variable was which station they watched. This is no longer the case, but the industry still acts as if it were. I can not think of a single person I know that watches the nightly news anymore. Sensationalism is the only thing that draws viewers to the news anymore, and a few people getting up in arms about their reporting is more likely to increase viewers of a particular station rather than decrease it. That translates to more revenue produced and advertisers get more exposure. Commercial advertising firms are overwhelmingly amoral and will follow the money, not calls to moral obligation. In my view, you cannot change the way a news station reports unless the market simply refuses to bear it. The media is corporately owned, and corporations by their very nature care only about money. The only way that anyone can affect such a machine is if vast amounts of people stop watching. It's happening all over the world, and the alternative has overwhelmingly been internet-based. Independent individuals and groups of individuals run their own websites that can be accessed free-of-charge. Granted, probably the large amount of what is "news" on the internet is inaccurate or useless - but is that any worse that the mainstream media? The difference is that you have a far greater degree of choice in what you can read online.

My recommendation of response to an industry that blatantly and repeatedly provides inaccurate and untrue information? Stop watching. Write letters to the management letting them know why if you want, but the act of protest is much more important than the words you say.

[LedJedi]

We (as a group) should sponsor a Public Service Announcement to run around 5 or 6pm.
'splaining the Castle Doctrine, things like that. be too expensive, though, to go into real detail. ah, well.
maybe one of us'll win the lottery.


oh, wait, our types don't go into gas stations to buy Lotto tickets!

I pledge 50 cents and 2 packages of grape kool-aid.

[TX Rancher]

oh, wait, our types don't go into gas stations to buy Lotto tickets!

My wife does, she generally buys 1 or 2 tickets at a time…just never the right one

I’m all behind sending mail and calling the news media when you see a negatively slanted article/show. But I think we need to add support to our list too. Responding only to the negative reports is half of the battle.

If you see a report that appears to be heading in a factual direction and doesn’t portray gun owners in a negative way, why not send a note to that editor/author commending them for their work?

I would put forward that the article doesn’t have to be as far right/pro-gun as I am to justify the “reward�, only that it be more pro-gun then the average story. We lost the “right� in small steps, and I think that’s the way we are going to regain it, small steps at a time. Reward the outlets that at least take a step in the right direction and maybe we can accelerate the process.

Get after the ones that are negative, but don’t forget to reward any positive movement also.