There are greater percentage of analytical sorts listening to NPR than probably any other radio programming.
Indeed, it is truly Radio Number Nerd (which is why I listen almost daily; at least to the news summary.*). It is probably the best platform for the "serious debate" we're allegedly having with the anti's since it undeniably has the best interview environment of all MSM sources (i.e. no screaming Piers Morgan, interrupting Rush, or self-righteous O'Reilly). If we really and truly wish to put forth a heartfelt argument based in fact and reason for discussion, NPR is the place it is most likely to be considered by calm, thoughtful people (biased though they may be). If we wish to demonize the opposition as unamerican traitors, and whip up a passionate frenzy in support of our Consitution, Fox or CNN are probably better venues.
* The features they've run this last year have tended to be much more narrowly focused and biased towards liberal issues/agenda than I'd come to expect from a previously quality organization. Like the rest of (all) mass-media, mainstream or otherwise, they show the same disdain for basic knowledge pertaining to firearms (it's not like they don't do research to accurately report on other topics), and reveal their utter ignorance of the subject when scouting for interviews.
They probably don't have contact info for any respectable gun people. Just the other day they were interviewing a "former gun enthusiast" who became fed up with the objects after the Sandy Hook shooting. In summary, she had never owned or shot a gun (but had thought about doing it "someday"
) but now
knew for a fact that guns were no good, and swore off the items (pre-emptively
).
NPR is staffed with intelligent professionals. At some level, even they had to be embarrassed to bring on an "expert" who they knew was so utterly ignorant and devoid of logic (it's not like she gave any
reasons for swearing off guns, just that Sandy Hook made her scared of the only thing that would save her in such a scenario).
It would be nice if a self-defense instructor of good repute (i.e. not a mall ninja or Dale Gribble) got on to talk about the moral obligation to defend ones self and others. This may even help separate the association of guns and the commission of crime (as opposed to defense against it). It seems all too common in today's attitudes for people to accept a state of helplessness--
whatever will I do if there is a shooting at the mall, or while I'm jogging? Duh, defend yourself, which would require a gun to do so effectively
.
Just "blows" peoples' minds, that.
TCB