general
April 10, 2003, 12:31 AM
Had taped and watched the 60 Minutes episode re: "Ballisitic Fingerprinting" and said to myself, "Self, I'm a gonna' write them fellers' a letter expressin' mah views." Then I kinda forgot about it till the other day when I received my NRA First Freedom mag. So I got busy.....
60 Minutes
524 West 57th Street
New York, NY. 10019
To Whom It May Concern,
I would like to respond to your story on February 9th, 2003 regarding "Ballistic Fingerprinting”. I cannot understand how you could try to qualify this incredible display of ignorance and politically biased journalistic manipulation as news?
Anyone of normal intelligence who has ever held a firearm can plainly see and understand the necessary steps to alter the characteristics left on the bullet case. It can be done in a moment, yet you imply that criminals won't go through the trouble or aren't smart enough to do so? I suppose you would also be in favor of making it a crime to alter the parts on a gun. It pains me to have to point this out to you; more laws do not make less crime. In case you do not know, it is already a crime to use a gun in the commission of a crime, to be a felon in possession of a gun, etcetera, and etcetera. But, let's waste billions of dollars in taxpayers’ hard earned wages on this fallacy that it will help catch criminals. The fact is, criminals will continue to use guns in crimes regardless of how many more laws and restrictions are placed on them. This is just a convenient way to begin the registration of all guns sold in America, so that they can later be easily confiscated.
The Second Amendment does not stand alone. The Fourth Amendment should protect all Americans from unlawful seizure, yet when certain guns are made unlawful based upon their mere appearance, they are summarily seized and destroyed without compensation, leaving little recourse for the owner. When governments begin to tread on this right it invariably becomes the stepping-stone for the rest.
I am sure you didn't mean to expose your political bias on this subject in such a glaringly obvious manner. I have watched the 60 Minutes program for decades and have never been so stunned by the political agenda being espoused by a supposed un-biased reporter, 60 Minutes, and ultimately the CBS network.
In light of your political motives and unless you begin to show journalistic integrity by objectively examining both sides of this issue you can consider me an ex-viewer, as I will never regard 60 Minutes as a reliable source for un-biased news on any topic of importance.
Sincerely,
:neener:
Also sent one to old Safer (hmm, a tell perhaps?). :rolleyes:
I think I'll go back over the tape and make a list of all the ads on the show and send a letter to each company explaining that I will no longer be watching this biased show and how they could better use their ad. budgets.
Guess I'm just kinda fed up with this attempt to manipulate public opinion on this and other issues.:fire:
OK - (/rant)
:barf:
60 Minutes
524 West 57th Street
New York, NY. 10019
To Whom It May Concern,
I would like to respond to your story on February 9th, 2003 regarding "Ballistic Fingerprinting”. I cannot understand how you could try to qualify this incredible display of ignorance and politically biased journalistic manipulation as news?
Anyone of normal intelligence who has ever held a firearm can plainly see and understand the necessary steps to alter the characteristics left on the bullet case. It can be done in a moment, yet you imply that criminals won't go through the trouble or aren't smart enough to do so? I suppose you would also be in favor of making it a crime to alter the parts on a gun. It pains me to have to point this out to you; more laws do not make less crime. In case you do not know, it is already a crime to use a gun in the commission of a crime, to be a felon in possession of a gun, etcetera, and etcetera. But, let's waste billions of dollars in taxpayers’ hard earned wages on this fallacy that it will help catch criminals. The fact is, criminals will continue to use guns in crimes regardless of how many more laws and restrictions are placed on them. This is just a convenient way to begin the registration of all guns sold in America, so that they can later be easily confiscated.
The Second Amendment does not stand alone. The Fourth Amendment should protect all Americans from unlawful seizure, yet when certain guns are made unlawful based upon their mere appearance, they are summarily seized and destroyed without compensation, leaving little recourse for the owner. When governments begin to tread on this right it invariably becomes the stepping-stone for the rest.
I am sure you didn't mean to expose your political bias on this subject in such a glaringly obvious manner. I have watched the 60 Minutes program for decades and have never been so stunned by the political agenda being espoused by a supposed un-biased reporter, 60 Minutes, and ultimately the CBS network.
In light of your political motives and unless you begin to show journalistic integrity by objectively examining both sides of this issue you can consider me an ex-viewer, as I will never regard 60 Minutes as a reliable source for un-biased news on any topic of importance.
Sincerely,
:neener:
Also sent one to old Safer (hmm, a tell perhaps?). :rolleyes:
I think I'll go back over the tape and make a list of all the ads on the show and send a letter to each company explaining that I will no longer be watching this biased show and how they could better use their ad. budgets.
Guess I'm just kinda fed up with this attempt to manipulate public opinion on this and other issues.:fire:
OK - (/rant)
:barf: