CNBC AR documentary this thursday

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, from the way they're pitching it now it sounds like it won't be that bad. If they try to be objective I'll be happy, even if they get some things wrong (hint: it's not a ".22 gauge." ;) Of course, we know what the speaker meant...)
 
Saw a clip on MSNBC (I know, but it was on at work so I stopped to watch the piece) where they had the law school student doing some 3d printing of an AR lower and magazines.

The host said he even shot one of the 3d printed AR's (in the MSNBC piece, I don't know if he is shown shooting in the CNBC documentary).

He mentioned in the MSNBC piece that less than 3% of gun crime is committed by the person that bought the gun.

It was on Morning Joe...maybe they have the clip online.

Edit: Yea, it's on the Morning Joe webpage: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3036789/. Just scroll down in the Latest Clips section and you'll see it.

R/
Craig
 
Aye aye aye.

This is showing some promise, but the shot of the dude with the 2a tattooed onto his forearms was a bit much.
 
15 minutes into it and they have the cute blond victim of the Aurora shooting, she says "her organs came out" .... now the ER doctor is talking about how horrible the wounds were from the AR.

The STUPID doctor just said the damage done with the AR-15 couldn't be done with a shotgun. What an utter moron!

Now some Mayo clinic guy is explaining yawing.

So much for not going for the cheap shock and unbiased viewpoint.
 
The blonde girl, who was shot, was telling the ER doctor the AR-15 shouldn't. E banned! Good for her! The doctor you can tell is an anti-2A.

Next, that idiot Yeager is going to be coming on showing one of his courses.

Think I'll change it now. So far, I would say it has "Anti-2A undertones in the narrative but gives counterpoint facts afterward." The script the narrator is reading is overly dramatic.
 
Yeah. Now they're showing the Yeager video of him talking about shooting people if an assault weapons ban goes into effect.

I'm done now.
 
Sullivan (a Eugene Stoner lackey) during the Armalite development time... "It was never designed to be a hunting rifle."

Blah, Blah, Blah... Neither was the Mauser, Springfield or Enfield. Now go into the hunting camp and try not to find at least one rifle not based on one those actions.

The snarky host is really piling it on thick.
 
Most owners are like the dentist. Rational, normal, law abiding citizens.

That doctor was an idiot. A shotgun or handgun can't do as much damage as a rifle? Please.

Overall theme:
People can use an AR15 for defense, fun, and sporting purposes but its' sole purpose is for war and killing.

Pretty damn biased if you ask me.
 
The STUPID doctor just said the damage done with the AR-15 couldn't be done with a shotgun. What an utter moron!

I didn't understand that statement either.

Am I to understand that a tumbling round will do more damage than a center of mass blast from a 12 gauge loaded with the Remington law enforcement reduced recoil buckshot that I have stashed away in my closet?

I'm no doctor but somehow I don't believe that statement.
 
Hi all,

Our team wanted to understand the AR-15’s immense popularity on both sides of the debate and go beyond the clichés. Portraying the AR-15 negatively is not the objective of the documentary and we can reassure all owners and enthusiasts that we aren’t choosing a side.
Shock, bias, crazy individuals, incompetent doctors spouting untruths. It was apparent in the first 15 minutes that it wasn't a balanced production. I'm not surprised, however, as I expected a slamfest, weapons of war slanted broadcast. I said as much in my post before yours above, before it aired.

I have a sixth sense about sniffing-out media facades, even before they are broadcast.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I was disappointed too, really hoping for more pro-gun, sensible gun-owner exposure. But considering I was expecting it to be a complete slam fest, it wasn't as bad as I anticipated. Somewhere between what I hoped for and what I expected, is what we got.

Sensible, everyday guy, Dentist AR owner +1
Aurora victim saying her organs fell out -1
Same victim saying she doesn't believe they should be banned +1
Doctor saying handgun and shotgun could not have created wounds -1
Other doctor implying the AR is the only gun that can shatter bone? -1
Way too much exposure to the antics of Yeager/survivalist mindset -1
Showing that every day men and women own AR's/ take courses +1
Sullivan saying it was meant to be a machine gun/never hunting rifle -1
Cody Wilson and 3D printing potential for lower receiver (scare tactics) -1
General undertone of it originally being a weapon of war (what gun wasn't?) -1

That Diaz guy was irritating, but his nonsense was balanced out by the NSSF president, so I'll call that a wash. So, by my count -4.
 
The upside is that the late-night audience for CNBC is minimal. People watch CNBC during the day, for market reports. Whoever was tuning in for this particular show already had a strong opinion on the subject.
 
I didn't catch it from the beginning, but from the little I saw (bits and pieces from second half), it looked like they portrayed it as a military born weapon and then found a couple of the more controversial 2a supporters (3d printer guy and some guy that they showed claiming he would start shooting people if Obama tried to use executive power for AWB). That was all I needed to see to know they were trying to lean in the typical anti-gun direction. Trying to portray the AR as a military only weapon and portraying AR owners as extremists or wackos.
 
10 mins in and they have stated that the burst option on a military version ar is "full auto machine gun" and now they just flat out said that there are no background checks at gun shows.

I'm gonna hit play, but I'm not sure for how long.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top