Are gun owners getting more senseless, negligent, or is the media covering guns more?

Main stream media is the propaganda branch of the anti-gun for ordinary citizens group.
For those who simply watch MSNBC or CNN so called News to form opinion rather than finding and applying some fact to a subject (and there are plenty), their opinion is based on what they hear from those talking heads.

When they repeat a lie long enough it becomes the known truth for many.

Carl N. Brown said:

The chart clearly shows that the accidental firearms death rate has gone from 0.7 in 1984 to 0.2 in 2006. The Media are great at manufacturing moral panicks over non-issues.

Click to expand...

Murders and violent crime in general have declined by half since they peaked in the early 90's. That doesn't keep the press from reporting every murder that happens. Likewise with traffic deaths. Two fatal car accidents were the headline stores on this mornings "news". Basically if someone dies they run the story.

News in general and especially local news doesn't even qualify as news anymore. Their budgets and staffing have been cut so much that they don't have the resources do do any really reporting. Instead it is highlights from the police reports, traffic, weather, and local sports teams.

One thing is pretty sure: the mainstream media isn't increasing the reports of incidents of violence prevented by people protecting themselves with legally possessed firearms.

"The other day it was the child in Alaska who was shot when his mother's .357 revolver fell from her holster onto the hammer "

You answered your own question. Since when is an accidental non-lethal child shooting in Alaska major news around the country? It's there because of someone's agenda... much like we now hear stories of kids left in hot cars from the other side of the country. These weren't stories we heard 10 or 20 or 50 years ago. These are stories the major news media outlets have decided to push for their own agenda.

Absolutely the media is fixated on firearms. Except in Chicago and Detroit. Those shootings get glossed over.
Take it from someone who's been watching the news for about 60 years. The liberal media is now nit-picking any shooting, and making it a much higher news priority than was the case back when there were far fewer gun laws. Back in the day, a shooting in some other state was no business of ours, and wouldn't even preempt local tax bond measures, or Grandma's 80th birthday. It's all about, "See, I told you so!"

Click to expand...

Chicago and Detroit (where im from) are nothing alike. Chicagos got commie gun laws Detroit DOES NOT. The Detroit police chief even told the citizens to arm themselves. Since then on the news instead of hearing about an innocent victim getting burglarized and shot your hearing the home owner shooting and most of the time killing the intruder. I see it on the news everyday! I love Michigan and I love Detroit, its a GREAT city. We rolled out TANKS in ww2! We are the manufacturing capital of America. Dont ever forget that. We have lots of good stuff in Detroit IM SO SICK of Detroit getting poo poo'd.

Seems like the buzz words are ............".I didn`t know it was loaded!! "

That`s from folks who screw around with weapons. J s/n.

rdhood said:

"The other day it was the child in Alaska who was shot when his mother's .357 revolver fell from her holster onto the hammer "

You answered your own question. Since when is an accidental non-lethal child shooting in Alaska major news around the country? It's there because of someone's agenda... much like we now hear stories of kids left in hot cars from the other side of the country. These weren't stories we heard 10 or 20 or 50 years ago. These are stories the major news media outlets have decided to push for their own agenda.

Click to expand...

So who's agenda is being pushed in the "kids in hot cars" stories? How about the "it snowed a lot in the North East" stories? Why do these types of stories get national attention? They are cheap and easy. Pick it up off the news wire and run it. No vetting, no reporting required.

There is a term for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churnalism

Oily Pablo said:

Great thread.

I think accidental firearm deaths actually peaked early last century in the USA. Over 100 years ago!

Click to expand...

You are certainly correct. That's clear in this graph going all the way back to 1900.

There is a concerted movement in the press etal. to vilify gun owners.

Red Wind said:

You are certainly correct. That's clear in this graph going all the way back to 1900.

Click to expand...

What is the rate per gun owner / user? The rate per 100,000 people doesn't matter much considering the percentage of people that own and use guns has been steadily falling as the population has been increasing.

This article has some interesting numbers and graphs.

Gun control activists constantly clamor that there’s a “gun violence epidemic” in the United States, but the numbers don’t reflect that statement. In fact, the argument could be made that as the firearms ownership rate increases there’s a correlation to a decline in the murder rate. So perhaps, more guns equal less crime?

That’s the position taken by a recent study from Virginia that showed a decrease in violent crime as the number of firearms being sold increased, and while it’s an interesting possibility there’s no good way to decisively prove it. On the other hand, this data does decisively disprove the gun control hypothesis that “more guns = more crime.”

Click to expand...

In the late 90's, I read a really good scholarly book, an anthology I guess you might call it, composed of lots of articles and snippets from lawyers, doctors, statisticians, psychologists, etc., about the psychology and science around the gun control movement; a very well balanced piece that made some (a very few) interesting points in favor of gun control, even as it largely deconstructed the most prevalent and fallacious gun control arguments.


Anyway, one of the psychologists noted the tactic of anti-gun groups to sensationalize and "trumpet" any gun-related incident to deliberately and falsely heighten the perception that these incidents are going on all the freakin' time, even when CDC stats, and FBI stats, etc., are showing the exact opposite.


There was an actual medical term for this, but I forget what it is; I suppose it's analogous to "confirmation bias" is statistics, but it boils down to, "This is what you see/hear all the time, so this is what you perceive to be 'real,' even if it isn't."


Perception Bias, maybe?


Anyway, it is exactly what is happening with the lame-stream media. Perhaps encouraged/supported by Hizonner-Da-Mayah Bloomberg and his cronies.

Perception Bias, maybe?


Anyway, it is exactly what is happening with the lame-stream media. Perhaps encouraged/supported by Hizonner-Da-Mayah Bloomberg and his cronies.

Click to expand...

Definitely, IMO. As has been said, stories that only the immediate population would hear about in 1975, before Cable News, Facebook,Twitter, Instagram, are now virally spread around the planet instantaneously.

Never has, "If it bleeds, it leads", been more true. The Socialists clasp this to their sagging breasts and proclaim the coming Apocalypse.

rdhood said:

"The other day it was the child in Alaska who was shot when his mother's .357 revolver fell from her holster onto the hammer "

You answered your own question. Since when is an accidental non-lethal child shooting in Alaska major news around the country? It's there because of someone's agenda... much like we now hear stories of kids left in hot cars from the other side of the country. These weren't stories we heard 10 or 20 or 50 years ago. These are stories the major news media outlets have decided to push for their own agenda.

Click to expand...

Or it could be that media is desperate for filler so they don't have to publish "embarrassing" stories. Case in point, with the middle east in turmoil and US Marines in danger, the Russian/Ukraine tensions, Ebola (remember Ebola?), the invasion of criminal aliens etc. the Gannet paper in Lafayette (IN) had the batman signal tattooed on the back of the W. Lafayette mayor's leg as front page news last week.

I've often wondered if the Journal & Courier has a department dedicated to what they don't want people to know.

guns have been attacked more by liberals and anti gun politicians so we hear about it more....THAT combined with the threats of bans I think makes people who otherwise wouldn't own a G17 or an AR15 go and buy one long before they are competent and trained enough to properly handle it.

They think watching the whole Die Hard Series on Netflix qualifies them and thus injuries and accidents happen.

I'll be honest, I was 19, had no experience with AR's. Wanted one for the cool factor and I bought one. One day right before Christmas I was on the toilet playing with it and BOOM. Went through the tile shower wall, through a 2X4 stud and lodged into the christmas tree. Had it not been Christmas I would have shot a $2000 wall unit and a $1000 TV.

I should have never owned that AR at that time in my life.

HRnightmare said:

guns have been attacked more by liberals and anti gun politicians so we hear about it more....THAT combined with the threats of bans I think makes people who otherwise wouldn't own a G17 or an AR15 go and buy one long before they are competent and trained enough to properly handle it.

They think watching the whole Die Hard Series on Netflix qualifies them and thus injuries and accidents happen.

I'll be honest, I was 19, had no experience with AR's. Wanted one for the cool factor and I bought one. One day right before Christmas I was on the toilet playing with it and BOOM. Went through the tile shower wall, through a 2X4 stud and lodged into the christmas tree. Had it not been Christmas I would have shot a $2000 wall unit and a $1000 TV.

I should have never owned that AR at that time in my life.

Click to expand...

Count your blessing you didn't have my Dad! A certain unnamed idiot that shall remain my brother tells when he was 18 and bought his very first new rifle. When he took the box out of the truck Dad asked him where the safety was. When the idiot couldn't tell him Dd made him put the box on the ground and he wasn't allowed to have it until he could tell Dad where the safety was, how to lock open the bolt and the proper (read safe) method of unloading.

Growing up I thought Dad's obsession for safety was the silliest thing in the world. Now that I have two children of my own I have reassessed the practice.

Red Wind said:

This article has some interesting numbers and graphs.

Click to expand...

Nothing in that article said that gun ownership rates are increasing.

Nothing in that article said that gun ownership rates are increasing.

Click to expand...

I never said it did or didn't, just that it was interesting. Put your own Google Fu to work. I'm tired.

Red Wind said:

I never said it did or didn't. Put your own Google Fu to work. I'm tired.

Click to expand...

The highlighted section of your quote said that gun ownership is increasing. The author of the article never backed up that claim with any evidence.

My Google Fu says the percentage of American household that own guns has been falling steadily for decades though there has been a uptick in the past 6 years.

JSH1 said:

The highlighted section of your quote said that gun ownership is increasing. The author of the article never backed up that claim with any evidence.

My Google Fu says the percentage of American household that own guns has been falling steadily for decades though there has been a uptick in the past 6 years.

Click to expand...

There's the solution! You go back and ask the author ,Nick Leghorn, (what a moniker!) for some valid citations on his claim.
Give us a report ASAP. The forum awaits,

Late to the topic, but I've searched the NY Times archives, and there are plenty of stories about "accidental" shootings. Overall, there were undoubtedly fewer because of today's online and cable news -- but it has been a media obsession for a while. Unsurprisingly, the reports seem to increase during pushes for gun control -- so the 1930s, the 60s, etc.

The NY times is an interesting place to look since the state had regulated pistols after 1911. In the 30s at least, it brings in stories from the wire, but there are still plenty to be found in the city ...

The liberal media is putting a spin on whatever they can to try to sway public opinion and further the left's agenda. It's that simple or else we'd be hearing stories about people using firearms to defend themselves. Just like another poster stated earlier they try to downplay the shootings in inner cities as well because that does not fit into their narrative.

It's the flavor of the Day. give it a few years and they will on to how dangerous Tibetan mastives or Irish wolf hounds are and how we are all going to die from shampoo giving us brain cancer

watching my local 6 oclock news, ive seen news articles on single car accidents in foreign countries. A news story about a drunk driver running into a burger stand in tokyo isnt even newsworthy in tokyo let alone in america.

Ive had news stories about jay walkers in arizona on the 6pm localnews in michigan. Lost dogs in portland as well.

You forget the politics behind these stories. Its not politic to say "three armed criminals killed during 5 hour standoff with police after robbing hospital dispensery". Its '3 more people died of gun violence today"

And accident quite often equals suicide. Historically, for example the 1800s. A person of means, or respectability, say your local boot store owner, ran out of money and couldnt live with the shame of gambling debts, his suicide became 'accident while hunting in the basement" or 'accident while cleaning gun" to save face for the family.
That still happens. Even in clear examples of suicide. its why "note equals suicide. No note equals murder" in 90% of old movies.

I believe the OP is referring to reports more recent than 2006 or 2008 per the posted graphs.

I suspect that the dramatically increased prevalence of concealed carry has contributed to an increase of events which are likely to get coverage. Whether or not irresponsible uses of guns has increased statistically overall, events may now be much more likely to happen in the public which is of course going to garner more attention from the media. Such seems to reflect the stories i hear about at a relatively high frequency. Also the fact the people are carrying guns more frequently simply means they handle them more frequently, hence more negligent discharges. Of course, recent changes in gun laws, for and against, simply shine light on the subject of firearms which means stories including them earn higher ratings so are covered more frequently.