Decent article re: "assault weapons" in my local paper

From the article. "A Sig Sauer and an AR-15 magazine generally holds 20- 30 rounds." ***?

ATLDave said:

Look, 80% right and 20% non sequitur is about 79% better than average for the newspaper industry when it comes to gun stuff.

Click to expand...

And that is acceptable, why?
Accuracy regarding magazine capacity is not a difficult research task. Even for a journalist.
JMHO, of course.

ATLDave said:

Look, 80% right and 20% non sequitur is about 79% better than average for the newspaper industry when it comes to gun stuff.

Click to expand...

True. Still makes them 100% untrustworthy until proven otherwise. I don't have much respect at all for someone who gets something as simple as that wrong. Literally all they had to do was google "Sig Sauer" and "AR-15" and in 30 seconds anyone who can read English would know that that statement was wrong.

They have a few things right, and some things wrong, as others have pointed out, but the elephant they don't discuss is the cost BEYOND the $200 tax tamp, and that's the cost of the fully automatic weapon itself, that places it well beyond the reach of casual shooters.....

Awhile back no one on "The Five" knew that it was illegal for felons to possess firearms.

After the garlic festival shooting the police chief (I believe) stated the weapon was an SKS which is like an AK47, and the press spent the rest of the coverage saying an AK47 like weapon instead of SKS.

Reporters know nothing about anything. Guns are just one of the many nothings.

ATLDave said:

What about it was truly "wrong"?

It's sort of like saying "pickup trucks and Fords can generally haul a garden bench." It's mixing a format/type with a brand, so there's sort of a category error there.

Click to expand...

Actually, it's more like saying, "Class 6 Medium Duty trucks and Fords can tow around 20,000-40,000 lbs. Well sure, if we're talking about a Ford F750. Not so much if it's a Ford Fiesta. See how much difference that can make? Like I said, it's something that anyone who can read, can find out in seconds by simply typing in a few words and hitting enter. Which means that the author of the article is either an idiot or lazy and not concerned about accurate reporting. Neither type of person is one I respect.

bearcreek said:

Actually, it's more like saying, "Class 6 Medium Duty trucks and Fords can tow around 20,000-40,000 lbs. Well sure, if we're talking about a Ford F750. Not so much if it's a Ford Fiesta. See how much difference that can make? Like I said, it's something that anyone who can read, can find out in seconds by simply typing in a few words and hitting enter. Which means that the author of the article is either an idiot or lazy and not concerned about accurate reporting. Neither type of person is one I respect.

Click to expand...

Or choice C: all of the above

I guess there is also choice D:dishonest

Given the bickering the article seems to have generated here, I doubt it's worth the click. I'll pass.

I think that something was cut during editing, since "Sig-Sauer" jumped up without any context.

Other than that, it was a much better article than seen in 99.44% of the news media.

Sistema1927 said:

I think that something was cut during editing, since "Sig-Sauer" jumped up without any context.

Other than that, it was a much better article than seen in 99.44% of the news media.

Click to expand...

+1
It had to be edited because of the way Sig-Sauer was suddenly added to the discussion of the AR

ATLDave said:

I don't even think it's inaccurate, except that they seem to be talking about Sig-brand rifles without specifying that.

That one line is a little off, but compared to most MSM gun pieces, it's by and large correct and oriented towards "fixing" a lot of common misconceptions.

Click to expand...

I have over a dozen Sig p226 20 rd 9mm magazines and I have no idea of how many AR 30 rd pMags.

Not sure what one has to do with the other except for ... more than 10

For those “questioning” the AJC article, I am SHOCKED how somewhat fair and accurate it is.

The AJC has, for decades, been a pro socialist, Blame America First, anti Bill of Rights (except for them), and lying about it, organization.

The first I ever heard of a Glock pistol was from an AJC article about a gun company moving into the Atlanta suburbs. The AJC said they manufactured a pistol that could go through airport security xrays because they were made of undetectable plastic.

MedWheeler said:

Given the bickering the article seems to have generated here, I doubt it's worth the click. I'll pass.

Click to expand...

I here you, the article comes out to give a good overall description of the difference which makes awareness of the basic facts which the public should learn about. And then, here we go, gotta have the experts go into how it is not exactly 100% technically correct. Seems the public would be just trying to understand the basics and give a flying hoot about the exact nomenclatures of one specific firearm or the details of specifics. The goal of the reporter was to give a "Basic" understanding and no need to start a confusion to folks that may not even know what a Sig is, which is the majority of the population. The reporter was NOT out to give a gun review on the Sig for gosh sake.
People reading the article are going to retain the main premise of the article which is that AR does not mean Assault Rifle and explain the difference between Automatic and Semi-auto. Sometimes the Gun Community can be as annoying as the anti gun crowd. So many experts. Thank goodness they did not write the article, they would have put everyone to sleep and not one would have even read the article.

It was a very good informative article to the general public. Kudos to the Reporter.

Given how poorly most articles about firearms are written in the general media, I think we should at least be happy that someone who wrote an article on the topic was at least less wrong than others. Inaccurate details breeds uninformed opinions and votes.

Yes, editing looks like it came into play.

However it's probably mostly irrelevant. Liberals who are pushing gun control and AWBs are thinking emotionally and from a place of fear, and facts don't matter to them on this topic because clearly no one is thinking about the children. Well written or not, logic has been lost in all the noise.

WestTexShooter said:

For those “questioning” the AJC article, I am SHOCKED how somewhat fair and accurate it is.

The AJC has, for decades, been a pro socialist, Blame America First, anti Bill of Rights (except for them), and lying about it, organization.

The first I ever heard of a Glock pistol was from an AJC article about a gun company moving into the Atlanta suburbs. The AJC said they manufactured a pistol that could go through airport security xrays because they were made of undetectable plastic.

Click to expand...

To be fair, I was also one of those poor souls (after I watched Die Hard)

ZeeM said:

To be fair, I was also one of those poor souls (after I watched Die Hard)

Click to expand...

I do remember that scene in Die Hard 2 ablut how expensive Glocks are and how they can go sneak through metal detectors.

The media and politicians had a panic attack about them at the time

The problem with the article was not the information. But the fact that the Democrats are not interested in facts. I doubt they would even read the article. Their agenda is not guns, magazines, etc. It is about power. The article of facts would do nothing but hurt their narrative from CNN.

ATLDave said:

they dilute it with a mix of hysterical tone and uncritical assumptions about the relationship of guns to violence in general.

Click to expand...

Because that is what the masses want to hear. The more tragic the story, the more emotion it can evoke, the more viewers it will have.

You don't hear of people turning on the news and asking, "What good happened in the world today?"