[alan]

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33410

[Graystar]

has coverage in your local paper been "evenhanded" or "onesided"?? Well, being that I live in New York City, I think even "onesided" may be a bit of an understatement. :(

[BenW]

Mine is the Santa Barbara News Press. The New York Times is the Wall Street Journal by comparison. The News Press has been pretty biased as long as I can remember. I used to nevertheless get it regularly just to keep up on local stuff. Since its current publisher has had it though, I can only stomach reading it once a week on Sunday, and I have to pick it up at the news stand in front of the drug store so I can get a bottle of Pepto Bismol to go with it. The News Press has sponsored fund raisers for Tom Diaz and its editor thinks he's a god.

[alan]

Graystar:

Touche!

Just curious as to what, if anything they, whichever paper or papers it is that you are talking about, might have offered re the Dixon case, also that of the young airman, whose name escapes my memory, both of whom shot armed intruders, one in his own home (Dixon), the other in his mothers apartment?

[Standing Wolf]

My local paper is the New York Times regurgitated, with a hefty dose of local "oh, woe is us!" coverage thrown in for good measure.

If it need be said, I don't subscribe.

[Graystar]

Just curious as to what, if anything they, whichever paper or papers it is that you are talking about The airman's name was Manuel Falquez and he "illegally" acquired a 9mm handgun to protect his mother, who just won 100,000 in the Lottery. Obviously, it was a very good idea.

The New York Times is anti-gun, and the Village Voice is virtually a socialist paper. Newsday and The Daily News are practically tabloids now so, who cares what they think. So I now get my news from Fox and various websites on the Internet.

[alan]

Graystar & Standing Wolf:

I grew up in NYC, and lived there for many years, Brooklyn, Queens and Manhattan, left in 1967.

I can not remember a time when The Times was anything but anti-gun. The Daily News is a tabloid, however "tabloid" is merely a physical format. The News and Mirror , both tabloids, were also RAGS. There isn't anything wrong with the tabloid format, though the term us usually used in the pejorative sense.

Nat Hentoff still writes for The Village Voice, and he always struck me as "conflicted" to use a polite phrase. He did, at one time, do some pretty good pieces on jazz. I've seen some pretty good pieces dealing with firearms in the WSJ, which surprising as it might seem, turns out to be a pretty good general information newspaper, it's name and one presumes it's orientation notwithstanding.

Unfortunately, media in general, that's print as well as broadcast have pretty much, on an ongoing basis, failed to come even slightly close to even handedly treating firearms, or anything having to do therewith. Perhaps some day, but not so far as I've noticed, today.

[Mike Irwin]

On one side is the Washington (Com)Post.

On the other is the Washington Times.

I have a funny feeling that somewhere in the middle is the truth.

[David Scott]

The Daytona Beach News-Journal is remarkably even handed when reporting firearms related matters. Of course, the fact that local law enforcement makes statements like "Mr. Jones was completely justified in shooting the housebreaker who was attacking his sleeping daughter" gives few opportunities to cavil. The DBNJ even did a very positive feature story a while back on a fellow who worked hard to make a go of his own convenience store in a poor part of town, after the store owner gave a 9mm Ruger lifendectomy to a knife-wielding robber with a rap sheet as long as the new Harry Potter book. They also made a bit of a hero about the Dad who was picking his son up from work at a local blockbuster when two guys tried to rob the store. The CCW carrying drew his 1911 and punched one perp's ticket to Hades, the other fled.

[Hkmp5sd]

The local paper here is owned, staffed and spoon fed articles by the New York Times.

[cool45auto]

There was a drive by shooting at a birthday party in a nearby city a few weeks ago. The person used an SKS so for the next few weeks after the shooting and during the trial you could find a picture of the evil rifle on the front page with the usual quotes: "assault rifle", "high powered" and the rest. The stock had been changed and it had a 30 round magazine in it so they ate that up.

[morganm01]

My local, the San Diego Union Tribune was definately anti for a long time. But from what I can tell it was just plain ignorance of the issue. I sent some letters to help them clarify how biased they were, along with a link to the new Gunfacts Version 3.2 and not only did they print every single letter, but they did an about face and printed one of the most pro-gun editorials I have ever seen in a big paper about the scam known as the AWB. Even gave a good slam to Fiennswine! I haven't seen any anti articles since!

[alan]

morganm01

I would say the following on your local paper.
Firstly, they are to be complimented. They allowed themselves to "learn", a skill that to few media outlets have ever managed to display. Other than the foregoing, with the wealth of factual data readily available to anyone who is interested, how did they ever develope the degree of ignorance you make mention of?

Perhaps we should take our wins where we find them, however certain aspects of the thing remain curious to me, possibly to others too.

[morganm01]

I can only speculate on that one Alan. Probably the answer is that journalists have become lazy and unwilling to do the research required to back their stories up. Or they at least settle for the easiest answer, not verufying their findings. The pro-2A article that was written was largely taken directly fdrom the letter I sent to them protesting their anti- stance. It used the same quotes and examples. At least the word got out though.

[alan]

morganm01:

You, at least, are making an effort, and it would appear that your efforts have had some success.

Sad to note, entirely to many gun owners, shooters, hunters, people whose "vested interests" one would think were obvious, don't even come close to making an effort. I've seen this at a couple of gun clubs that, over a period of years, I've been a member of. You may have also.

As for these so-called journalists, they can be as lazy as their employers will allow them to be. I suspect that about the only thing that might make any impression on such types is the cessation of their pay checks.

It strikes me that we cannot afford such self-indulgence, yet as I noted above, it seems that all to many of "our side" wallow in it. Something that I've posted earlier, for readers to consider. The toll free phone number for capitol switchboard is 1-800-648-3516. All that one need do is to tell the ladies that answer which congressional or senate office they wish to speak with.

I sometimes wonder as to how many viewers utilized the phone number?

[morganm01]

Alan, thx for the number, I actually didn't know about it .

Below is the letter I just sent to my local paper. Everyone please feel free to copy, edit, change in any way you want and put your name on it, this letter and send it to your local papers editor.

"After the terrible shooting at the Lockheed Martin (LM) compound today, the SDUT should investigate the fallacy of "gun-free safe-zones" LM does not allow any guns of any kind onto it's property, even those carried by law abiding concealed carry permit holders. As is evidenced by this shooting, that policy leads to a feeling of safety, but actually allows rampaging murdurers to commit horrible acts unhindered and free from someone stopping them in self defense! The SDUT should look into why so many mass shootings happen in these gun-free safe-zones. Could it be that the shooters know they will not face resistance? Fact is, after the co-workers expressed concern over this individual, they were still prevented from having the best tool to defend themselves, and had they chosen to do so anyway, they would have been fired. Some people may be wondering "what second amendment?". "

[alan]

moreganM01:

If you like, to hell with The Second Amendment, though I do NOT take this tack. On the other hand, what of the employers responsibility for the safety, of his employees, while they are in his facility?

Employers might have a "no arms" policy, but what do they do in the way of follow up? Likely there were, at this installation, armed security guards on duty, the proverbial 24/7, please excuse my using that sickening phrase, or "buzz word". Given that, how did this latest nut case manage to bring two long guns, a shotgun and a semi-automatic rifle, into the place?

Who is responsible for the performance or lack there of of these rent-a-cops, or whatever they are? By the way, your letter to the ediutor looks like a good piece of writing.

Talking about performance or the lack thereof, how long do you think it will be before the ambulance chasers innundate the scene?