Gunsmith Justin Davis holds a Ruger mini-14 rifle with a configuration that makes it illegal to manufacture under the assault weapons ban.
Whaddya think? Did they get a little feedback and edit the caption?
September 13, 2004, 01:04 PM
Sturm, Ruger must have sent in an attack lawyer...
September 13, 2004, 01:11 PM
The new president of Ruger is a lawyer, formerly their top lawyer.:D
September 13, 2004, 02:07 PM
Fox parrots AP? No sir, I don't like it.
My favorite: "'It shoots exactly the same ammo at exactly the same rate of fire,' said Davis." It's positioned in the piece so it sounds like he's referring to the M16. Slick.
September 13, 2004, 02:22 PM
I've fired off emails to Fox news, CNN, and the local papers/news stations...all of whom have merely parrotted Oxley's article from The AP. ACK, what a bunch of crap.:banghead:
September 13, 2004, 02:23 PM
Watched NBC morning show. Was actually surprised that they got some facts straight. "Semi-auto" Ban was mostly "cosmetic"
Of course they had some gunsel in a gunshop that said "Now I can get me an Ar-15 and a AK-47"
Didn't have to wait fella....been available all along.
It was biased....but not as biased as I expected, then they showed sarah Brady. :barf:
September 13, 2004, 02:38 PM
The CNN 'on hold' rotating new blurb makes it sound like the ban expiration will make it legal to buy machineguns from every 7-11 and WalMart. What a way to spread dis-information amoung the ignorant masses.
September 13, 2004, 05:40 PM
The newspaper this morning had a paragraph on how AWs were (I love being able to say "were") not machine guns, and the difference between semi and full automatic. I was surprised, to say the least.
September 13, 2004, 06:50 PM
"It was the ultimate shock," Feinstein said in an interview. "That building is one of the great economic citadels in the city, and you see this prestigious law firm. And then -- boom. Someone comes in, aggrieved, and goes right through the place."
Wow! What a fascinating insight into that politico's twisted little brain. She only got concerned when high-end lawyers got shot. It was too close to her own elitist, upper 1% cabal. She views the AWB as a means of keeping the unwashed (those she derisively calls "Mr. and Mrs. America") in their place.
Does anyone know that fellow in the BBC photo? The jerks have been using his picture in every anti-gun piece they put out. He should speak up and explain that the AWB had nothing to do with machine guns like the one he is holding.
September 13, 2004, 07:13 PM
Can anyone spot all the factual errors in that BBC link?
These are the ones I sent them... once I found their feedback link at the bottom of the page. I selected the feedback topic of "Factual Errors."This article has several errors of fact or omission...
- The ban says nothing about 'use' of 'assault weapons.'
- The ban says nothing about the 'keeping' of 'assault weapons' in the home or any other place.
- "criminals would now find it easier to get hold of the weapons." This is false. The ban changed nothing about the legal process or requirements for buying or selling a firearm in the US.
- "The 1994 ban covered 19 different types of military assault weapons, including AK-47, Kalashnikov and Uzi rifles..." This is false. A military assault weapon is a small caliber, full auto or select fire weapon. The weapons referred to as "assault weapons" in the 1994 ban are all semi-automatic civilian arms.
- The graphic embedded in the article contains specifications for the full auto variants of these weapons. No mention is given that the data for semi-automatic weapons is different.
- The article appears to be willfuly bluring the line between Full Auto weapons and their legal semi-auto counterparts. Fully Automatic weapons are covered under an older law. The Assault Weapons ban does not apply to them. They are in a completely different category than the semi-auto variants the ban affected and that this article is trying to ignore.
September 14, 2004, 02:57 PM
I wrote to Chuck Oxley of the AP whose article regarding the AWB sunset was VERY WIDLEY used and was pleasantly surprised to receive a response from him today. While not overly thrilled with his response, it seems that the misrepresentations may not have been of his design, but those of his editor (which I can believe).
Dear Mr. Oxley,
I'm sure that as a reporter of news, you have checked your facts and have attempted to present a factual article, but you have grossly misled the public with your article about the sunset of the 1994 AWB. You (and most of your associates) mention that "firearms like AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s can now be legally bought." The implication is that this sunset affects the availability of fully automatic weapons (which have been available for the past 10 years but severely restricted since 1934). The sunset of the AWB affects ONLY semi-automatic weapons with cosmetic features that 'look scary' and does not affect the function of the weapon or the power of the ammunition fired. Please stop lying to the public and check your facts before publishing your stories. The public expects and deserves better.
The reference to fireares like ``AK-47s, Uzies and TEC-9s'' was not in my original copy, which I understand you did not have the benefit of reading. I have attached the CORRECTED version below. That said, your letter is typical of the coarse public discourse (on both sides), which we in the media see all the time. If you want your letter to have impact, you might try a more civil tone.
BTW, I happen to be a gun owner (three handguns, two shotguns and a rifle, plus state CWP) and an avid hunter.
¶ r abx
¶ AP-Assault Weapons, 1st Ld-Writethru,0961
¶ Gun shops and police officers brace for end of assault weapons ban
¶ Eds: Rewrites throughout to CORRECT that Uzis and AK-47s are still banned under a law governing imports, UPDATE with comments from Maryland gun dealer, add comment from Kerry, Bush from BC-Kerry, trim older material.
¶ With BC-Assault Weapons-List
¶ AP Photo IDTM101
¶ By CHUCK OXLEY
¶ Associated Press Writer
Doc: 00003958 DB: research_t3 Date: Mon Sep 13 13:55:42 2004
*** Version history. (* = this story, F = final, S = semifinal) ***
VD852TU7G0 09-13-2004 13:55:42* AP-Assault Weapons, 1st Ld-Writethru:Gun s
Copyright 2004 By The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
^AP-Assault Weapons, 1st Ld-Writethru,0961<
^Gun shops and police officers brace for end of assault weapons ban<
^Eds: Rewrites throughout to CORRECT that Uzis and AK-47s are still banned under a law governing imports, UPDATE with comments from Maryland gun dealer, add comment from Kerry, Bush from BC-Kerry, trim older material.<
^With BC-Assault Weapons-List<
^AP Photo IDTM101<
^By CHUCK OXLEY=
^Associated Press Writer=
¶ BOISE, Idaho (AP) _ The expiration Monday of a 10-year federal ban on assault weapons means firearms like TEC-9s can now be legally bought _ a development that has critics upset and gun owners pleased.
¶ The 1994 ban, signed by President Clinton, outlawed 19 types of military-style assault weapons. A clause directed that the ban expire unless Congress specifically reauthorized it, which it did not.
¶ Some of the 19 _ foreign-made weapons like the AK-47 and Uzi _ are still banned under a 1989 law prohibiting imports of specific automatic weapons.
¶ Studies by pro- and antigun groups as well as the Justice Department show conflicting results on whether the ban helped reduce crime. Loopholes allowed manufacturers to keep many weapons on the market simply by changing their names or altering some of their features or accessories.
¶ The differences between assault weapons and guns on the market before the ban expired are "cosmetic," Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said Monday on CBS's "The Early Show."
¶ "To lead anyone to believe we're talking about a class of guns that's more powerful, makes bigger holes, shoots more rapidly is not true," LaPierre said.
¶ Gun-control advocate Sarah Brady disagreed. "There's nothing cosmetic at all about this law," she said on "The Early Show."
¶ Gun shop owners said the expiration of the ban would have little effect on the types of guns and accessories that are typically sold and traded across their counters every day.
¶ At the Boise Gun Co., gunsmith Justin Davis last week grabbed up a black plastic rifle resembling the U.S. military's standard issue M-16 from a row of more than a dozen similar weapons stacked against a wall.
¶ The civilian version of the gun, a Colt AR-15 manufactured before 1994, could be sold last week just as easily as it can be sold this week. "It shoots exactly the same ammo at exactly the same rate of fire," said Davis.
¶ However, the expiration could result in sharply lower prices for some weapons, said Sanford Abrams, owner of Valley Guns in Baltimore and vice president of the Maryland Licensed Firearms Dealers Association.
¶ He said some pre-ban, military-style rifles with a combination of banned features such as flash suppressors, bayonet mounts and detachable magazines had been trading at gun shows for up to $1,600, but the price could drop to less than $900 since those characteristics will again be allowed on new weapons.
¶ "The biggest complaint we had was from ex-military wanting to buy a version of what they had in the military," Abrams said. "They wanted to buy one but they didn't want it to be minus any of the characteristics it had in the military."
¶ Many states _ including California, Massachusetts, New York and Hawaii _ have passed their own laws curbing the use of assault weapons. Some of those are more stringent than the federal ban.
¶ U.S. Rep. Butch Otter, R-Idaho, trumpeted the end of the federal law.
¶ "President Clinton's so-called 'assault weapons' ban was nothing more than a sop to antigun liberals," Otter said Friday in a written statement. "It provided only the illusion of reducing gun violence, but it did real damage to our liberties."
¶ But advocates for the ban, including the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, point to some particularly vicious shootings in which military-style weapons were used _ including the 10 killings in the sniper shooting spree that terrorized residents in Maryland, Virginia and Washington, D.C., in 2002.
¶ National police organizations such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the International Brotherhood of Police Officers and the Fraternal Order of Police all support the renewal of the ban. President Bush has said he would sign such a bill if Congress passed it.
¶ Presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry criticized Bush for not pushing for an extension.
¶ "Today George Bush made the job of terrorists easier and made the job of America's law enforcement officers harder and that's just plain wrong," Kerry said Monday.
¶ Presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said Kerry's comment was "another false attack from Senator Kerry." Bush believes the best way to curb gun violence is to enforce laws that are on the books, McClellan said.
¶ The expiration of the assault weapons ban does not mean the end of federal background checks. The 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act is separate legislation from the assault weapons ban, said Daniel Wells, chief of the FBI unit charged with overseeing the background checks system.
¶ "The change in law relating to assault weapons has no impact on the Brady Law," Wells said.
¶ Davis predicted the biggest change in his business will be the ability of manufacturers and importers to market higher capacity ammunition magazines _ the removable "clip" that holds and feeds bullets through guns.
¶ Under the 1994 ban, the maximum capacity of a magazine was set at 10 rounds.
¶ On the Net:
¶ National Rifle Association: http://www.nra.org
¶ Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: http://www.bradycampaign.org
Forgive me, I sent my latest response and neglected to copy it first or to CC myself. If he again replies, I'll post my second letter and his response.
September 14, 2004, 05:53 PM
The follow up from Mr. Oxley...seems pretty reasonable except for his editors changing his story to suit their agenda.
My second letter/response:
Dear Mr. Oxley,
I apologize if my tone seemed brusque, but articles bearing your byline appeared on several major news outlet's web sites and in our local major news paper. Excerpts were posted on local news web pages. EVERY instance included the phrase "firearms like AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s can now be legally bought." The implication being that, from a layperson's point of view, fully automatic weapons were going to flood the streets. The overall tone of coverage of the AWB sunset has been one of 'blood in the streets' and I believe that phrase has been used by Sarah Brady more than once. The simple fact is, and as a gunowner and shooter you certainly recognize this, nothing is going to chance. Crime will not increase, more cops will not be killed in the line of duty, children everywhere will not be mowed down in a hail of gunfire from automatic weapons. A factual presentation of the details of the AWB easily shows that the restrictions were cosmetic. I'm also sorry that your original story was misrepresented, but the widespread use of that misrepresentation was what drove me to write. Maybe forwarding the comments you have received to your editors so that they can be more cautious in the addition of information to your articles is in order. As you undoubtedly know, fully automatic weapons have been heavily regulated and taxed since 1934 and the AWB sunset has no effect on those regulations.
I sincerely thank you for your time and response and appreciate the update and clarification on the addition to your original article.
His latest reply:
This is the 9th paragraph is from my original story, which ran on our state wire and in Idaho newspapers on Saturday. My story was completely changed later by editors in New York and I didn't even know it had gone on national wires until late yesterday (I was off work). I understand there is no way you could have known this.
¶ BOISE, Idaho (AP) _ After a 10-year federal ban, gun owners and buyers will be able to legally purchase high-capacity ammunition clips and alter their firearms to more closely resemble military-style assault weapons beginning Monday.
¶ But local gun shops say the expiration of the assault weapons ban will have little effect on the types of guns and accessories that are typically sold and traded across their counters every day.
¶ At the Boise Gun Co., gunsmith Justin Davis grabbed up a black plastic rifle resembling the U.S. military's standard issue M-16 from a row of more than a dozen similar weapons stacked against a wall.
¶ The civilian version of the gun, a Colt AR-15 manufactured before 1994, could be sold last week just as easily as it can be sold next week.
¶ "It shoots exactly the same ammo at exactly the same rate of fire," said Davis.
¶ ``A common misconception among the non-gunning public is that the assault weapons ban applied to rapid, automatic fire weapons, Davis said. But those types of guns have been outlawed since 1934 and will remain banned after Monday.,''
I appreciate your response and your position.The problem, in my opinion, is that too few journalists know which end of a gun to hold, let alone how they work or what they can do. The perception among my colleagues that "gun nuts" are all wild-eyed crazy people is only reinforced by the constant contact they have with exactly those types of people ( The do exist -- I live in Idaho, so I know some of them personally). Unfortunately, me fellow mainstream journalists have relatively little contact with people for whom guns are only a small part of their lives, rather than their entire focus. In my own work, I try to write stories that portray guns and gunning as an ordinary part of American life (see this feature story I wrote about a year ago: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Travel/US/Idaho_rifle_range_031202.html)
Lastly, if the NRA would focus its efforts on promoting gun safety and positive public relations rather that "targeting" politicians who disagree, the whole conflict would be a helluva lot less divisive.
September 14, 2004, 06:46 PM
Sounds like we need to start some sort of foundation to take journalists and other media related folks (editors, etc.) out shooting.
Familiarity will help our cause.
September 14, 2004, 06:52 PM
With the additions and deletions in Mr. Oxley's article, can it be any more clear how wildly biased editors are? Is there any way we can publicize this? Anyone have John Stossel or John Lott's number or email handy?
If you enjoyed reading about "Lies CNN and AWB" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!