Stossel on Fox News


PDA






WALKERs210
June 28, 2010, 12:26 AM
Probably misspelled his name but at least I remembered it. This Sunday Morning around 3:00 am I woke up and could not sleep. Went to the news channels and he was doing an interview with several people including an attorney for City of Chicago about the 2nd Admin. There were several other people there also in support but for Stossel to go on the defense of the 2nd amendment got my attention. He even went into the rise of armed crime in England where guns are not allowed and had very accurate numbers to back it up. The attorney for gun control was to say the least out classed and didn't have his homework ready for the show. I was hoping that it would be on again today so I could see it from beginning to end. Never expected an established news commentator to actually be on the side of gun owners.

If you enjoyed reading about "Stossel on Fox News" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Justin
June 28, 2010, 12:31 AM
"Stossel."

It's spelled just like it sounds. :)

strambo
June 28, 2010, 01:11 AM
John Stossel is a Libertarian...I think he rocks! He is the only Libertarian, main stream media guy i know of.

earlthegoat2
June 28, 2010, 01:13 AM
Stossel is an intresting case who went from a staunch anti gun New Yorker to being very pro 2nd Amendment.

leadcounsel
June 28, 2010, 01:40 AM
I think he's great, and agree with him about 99% of the time!

danprkr
June 28, 2010, 12:24 PM
John Stossel is a Libertarian...I think he rocks! He is the only Libertarian, main stream media guy I know of.

Main stream kicked him out for reporting facts as opposed to their BS opinions, that's why he had to go to Fox :D

Seriously, watching Hupp go after the Brady guy was very satisfying. Especially when the Brady guy confronted with the fact that when (I forget the city) banned handguns crime went up, and when they dropped the ban the crime went down, and all he could sputter about was that the statistics were too complicated for us simple folks to understand, and that crime would have gone up more without the ban etc. Of course when the pro people were talking about allowing CHL holders to carry on campus we couldn't 'what if' the VA Tech shooting. No no no that would be intellectually dishonest.

What hypocritical moron.

Manco
June 28, 2010, 12:29 PM
Stossel is an intresting case who went from a staunch anti gun New Yorker to being very pro 2nd Amendment.

That's because he's a pretty reasonable guy (we need more of those in journalism these days). Any clear, logical thinker can overcome their former ignorance as long as they're willing to learn. Unfortunately most people are "emotional thinkers," however, and won't ever change their minds about certain topics like firearms (or just about anything) until their lives are placed in jeopardy or they're seriously injured by somebody else. Stossel used to have a great segment on 20/20 called "Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity" (there is also a companion book), and in some cases he probably had to dispel myths that he had believed in himself (myths about firearms being among them). After a while, I guess ABC could no longer tolerate the enormous flood of truth coming out of that show, and when executives are made to feel stupid by an employee, the employee gets fired (or more likely pressured to quit, so that both sides would have plausible deniability about what really went on internally).

MT GUNNY
June 28, 2010, 12:40 PM
http://video.foxbusiness.com/#/v/4255425/your-right-to-own-a-gun/?playlist_id=87530

you can watch several of his gun episodes.

Guns and more
June 29, 2010, 09:03 AM
Stossel worked for ABC news doing common sense stories on 20-20 and the like. I'm sure the ABC management wanted him to spout the liberal agenda so he left.
He now has a show on Fox Business Network, and often shows up on O'Reilly. (and they often disagree.)
The guy just makes sense.

ranger335v
June 29, 2010, 09:36 AM
Manco, #7: ""emotional thinkers,"

Those are mutually exclusive terms; liberals "emote", conservatives "think". And that's a fact! :)

HexHead
June 29, 2010, 12:22 PM
John Stossel is a Libertarian...I think he rocks! He is the only Libertarian, main stream media guy i know of.
Glenn Beck is a Libertarian also.

tkopp
June 29, 2010, 03:02 PM
I'm not a fan of a lot of Fox's opinion guys, but Stossel did a great job in that interview. My only complaint was that his graphs relating to handgun violence in DC pre- and post- ban didn't show historical trends for context. I just wish it was longer to allow each representative to talk more and get more engaged. Sounds like he's a skilled moderator.

danprkr
June 30, 2010, 04:16 PM
I to agree that Stossel is a great moderator. His guest never seem to be able to commandeer the show. Even though some of them try. I to wish some of the segments were longer and more in depth, but he only has one hour a week so I think he does a pretty good job of balancing it all out.

Roswell_Kid
June 30, 2010, 05:07 PM
Stossel landed at position #61 on the "100 Americans the Left Hates Most (http://media.glennbeck.com/docs/100americans-pg1.pdf)" list, edging out Chuck Norris (66) and Jon Voight (71) in liberal hate factor. Like other intelligent conservatives in the public eye, it seems he has failed to attract the admiration of the likes of Janeane Garofalo and Rosie OŽDonnell. :barf:

IŽd bet that if there were such a list for forums, THR would be in the top 50.

CraigC
June 30, 2010, 08:07 PM
Stossel is a good one and his book, "Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity" is excellent.

courtgreene
July 1, 2010, 12:40 AM
I like the guy and liked the show, but there is one thing I have to disagree with.
Those are mutually exclusive terms; liberals "emote", conservatives "think". And that's a fact!
Take this from a Christian Minister who is also very politically conservative (unaffiliated-borderline libertarian)... Two words prove that statement wrong. "religious right." It is one hundred percent emotional and HUGE on the conservative side of the aisle. Let's not confuse gun issues with issues of logic vs emotion. Oh, in addition to being qualified to weigh in on the religious (Christian) right, im also extremely logical, so I can weigh in on that too.

hemiram
July 1, 2010, 01:19 AM
I have friends on both sides and the conservatives tend to be more emotionally based then the liberal ones.

Manco
July 1, 2010, 07:56 AM
Let's not confuse gun issues with issues of logic vs emotion.

Agreed--when I said that most people are "emotional thinkers" I meant the general population, not liberals versus conservatives. The ones on our side usually won't listen to reason, either, but obviously I'm not so worried about them with regard to the RKBA. I do think that logic favors our cause, however, as John Stossel, for one, demonstrates. Those who reason can be convinced, but first we have to dispel their ignorance. Those who do not reason will only be convinced by emotional appeals, the way our opposition often does things.

We haven't been effective at the latter (except when "preaching to the choir") because people have such a knee-jerk reaction to those who like guns, as well as guns themselves. They put value judgments on inanimate objects that are hard to overcome. What we need, as the RKBA will soon likely draw more media coverage at the national level than it has in a long time, is to make sure that stories about successful self-defense shootings are featured, utilizing as much emotion and as many children as possible (that might sound a bit cynical or ruthless, but the children won't suffer for it). Not everybody has to be convinced, but we do need a majority of people to at least understand what the RKBA is about, and tolerate if not embrace it.

courtgreene
July 1, 2010, 12:11 PM
manco,
good points. based on your comments there is good news. I think the majority of people already do understand what RKBA is about. I would bet (no scientific research here, just one idiot's opinion) that most Americans, even among those who do not exercise that right, are for it or at least not against it. Maybe that is because I live in the South, but a lot of people who I meet and speak with who do not have guns either have no problem with others that do (ambivalent) or even support others owning guns adding "but I don't because I have kids" or something like that. The problem is that those with the power or the loudest voices (press) often do not understand. When congressmen call semi's "machine guns" you know that they have no clue what they are talking about... but they are the guys/gals that count.

Yes, that does sound extremely ruthless but I get your point. kids are cute, and "for the kids" makes an impact. The way you worded it sounds scary though.

ccsniper
July 1, 2010, 12:43 PM
I have always liked John Stossel because he has always leaned our way rather than hide facts to push his own agenda.

robhof
July 1, 2010, 12:52 PM
I saw an interview with him on another Fox show and he stated that he was anti-gun until he did his homework and the NRA and the pro gun people were correct on the crime statistics, based on actual police crime rate statistics, rather than biased polls.

basicblur
July 1, 2010, 05:43 PM
My guide shows Stossel on @ 12am Friday.
I saw him on another show, and he stated the "More Guns, Less Crime" show was going to be repeated this week. 'Course, he's still quoting the Thursday 8pm times etc-my DVR guide and FBN never seem to agree with the broadcast times stated by the talking head promos.

For those of you that haven't seen it-Hennigan (from The Brady Bunch) states how the laws they helped pass work, but immediately after stated laws don't make much difference. He also stated PA has gun registration, which folks from PA say is not true (original thread here (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=529668))

General Geoff
July 1, 2010, 06:01 PM
He also stated PA has gun registration, which folks from PA say is not true

It is absolutely not true; there's a state-police-kept "not-a-registry" database of handgun purchases made within the state, but this database does not include handguns legally brought in from other states, handguns transferred between family members, and handguns which were acquired before the database was created. The state police argued IN COURT, that it is NOT a registry, due to it being incomplete; if it were considered a registry, it would be illegal and shut down, due to a state law which makes maintaining a registry of privately owned firearms explicitly illegal.

Yeah, hurts my head too... the bottom line is that a lot of police like to call it a registry and use it like a registry ("I'm gonna run your gun's serial number to make sure it's registered to you"), but it is not actually a registry, and the police have no lawful authority to confiscate your gun just because it's not listed in their database as having been purchased by you. They bank on you not knowing this.

Manco
July 1, 2010, 06:13 PM
I think the majority of people already do understand what RKBA is about. I would bet (no scientific research here, just one idiot's opinion) that most Americans, even among those who do not exercise that right, are for it or at least not against it.

I bet that you're right, as even here in California I seldom see any negative word on the street from self-defense shootings or even killings. Most of the negativity comes from media spin doctoring, which sometimes comes right after interviewing several witnesses or neighbors who made positive comments. On the whole, Americans are generally good but exceptionally vindictive people when it comes to crime (hence all the incarceration). :evil: I mean this in the best possible way, of course. ;)

Yes, that does sound extremely ruthless but I get your point. kids are cute, and "for the kids" makes an impact. The way you worded it sounds scary though.

I probably could have used a better word than "utilizing" but you get my drift. Remember that crooks are the ones who sometimes put the lives of children in danger when they invade homes, and the only really scary thing is that so many parents are unable to protect them. Then of course there are older children who are sometimes forced to do the defending themselves, and from what I've seen they usually triumph. I'm a bit ambivalent regarding the latter as promotional material because while some would appreciate the idea of young men or women stepping up and doing their duty ahead of their time, some would react negatively toward the idea of children shooting people.

SSN Vet
July 1, 2010, 07:08 PM
I remember watching Stossel years ago on ABC and I sware you could see Barbara Walters seething with contempt and disdain for him.

Though he seemed to come accross as kind of whiny back then, it was always pleasant to see BW so bent she would squirm :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Stossel on Fox News" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!