FOX News just called the M4 a "heavy weapon"

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BammaYankee

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
135
In a lead in to a story about the situation in Chicago, FOX's resident former Marine pilot turned news anchor (I forget his name) just said the. M4 carbine is a "heavy battlefield weapon"!!

IMO FOX has a bias against guns in general - they seem to run more negative internet gun related stories on a daily basis than CNN or MSNBC- but this is rediculous!

I wonder if R. Murdoch, being an Aussie, has encouraged this negative bias against guns. Not so 'fair and balanced' as far as I'm concerned!
 
I doubt there's any conspiracy. Standard New York City attitude toward weapons of any sort, and he probably never gave it a second thought.
 
I'd bet you could hand him a M4 and a M14 and he could not tell then two apart, but I bet he could tell you which one was "heavy"
 
The anchor who said it was Greg Kelley.
Click to expand...
Is that the same Greg Kelley who's father is the NYC Police Commissioner? Yeah, he could be biased; he probably thinks the Sullivan law is reasonable.
 
FOX's resident former Marine pilot turned news anchor (I forget his name) just said the. M4 carbine is a "heavy battlefield weapon"!!
Click to expand...

Well, how much tacticool junk was on it? That garbage can get pretty heavy.
 
I believe his military title is Major Greg Kelley, who probably knows more about aircraft than small arms terminology. With that said, half the people who post on gun forums make similar errors.

Give ol' Rupert credit, Fox does have the greatest selection of blond bimbos of any news organization bar none.
 
Compared to handguns,, They are heavy weapons Fellas...

Maybe not the ammo, but M4 is a step up in firepower for sure.
 
romma said:
Compared to handguns,, They are heavy weapons Fellas...
Click to expand...
OKayyyy... That's a bit of a logical stretch.
Maybe not the ammo, but M4 is a step up in firepower for sure.
Click to expand...
Compared to WHAT?

No way is an M4 considered a heavy weapon by the military. Only a completely uninformed, who cares about the facts, probably biased against firearms, type would consider it a heavy weapon.

Apologists... <shakes head in wonderment>
 
BammaYankee said:
I wonder if R. Murdoch, being an Aussie, has encouraged this negative bias against guns.
Click to expand...

Next thing you'll know he'll be encouraging people to eat vegemite and start off the news with "G'day!" :rolleyes:

I'm pretty sure Don Gwinn in right on the mark.
 
OKayyyy... That's a bit of a logical stretch.
Click to expand...
The speaker was supposed to be a pilot, who would potentially be more familiar with the Beretta than an AR.

P.S. Plus, it probably just came right off the teleprompter.
 
Actually, that is a pretty accurate statement. The M-4 is a battlefield weapon, and is a lot heavier than, say, a pistol.
 
Yes, Greg Kelly's dad is NYC police commissioner, but I doubt he's a liberal as he is a former active duty Marine Harrier pilot and currently a Lt. Col. in the Marine reserves (he was recently promoted). He is a personal friend of Lt. Col. Oliver North and spent a lot of time in Iraq with him and we all know North's a conservative and pro 2A.

I am shocked Kelly would refer to an M4 as a "heavy seapon", but it could have been just a slip of the toungue. Give this guy a break. He is a combat veteran and from what I can tell a good guy.
 
Compared to handguns,, They are heavy weapons Fellas...

Maybe not the ammo, but M4 is a step up in firepower for sure.
Click to expand...

Ditto on what I think Fox was trying ineptly to communicate.

The more Chicago and DC keep being crime capitols of America the less and less sense their 'sensible' and 'common sense' crime control (left speak for gun control) seems 'sensible' and 'common sense' to voters. More and more people are actually believing they need to take personal responsibility for their own hides.
 
I will concede that my Murdoch comment was, upon retrospect, off the mark and I have nothing but respect for Greg and FOX on whole.

My original intent was to highlight that news outlets inform and shape public perception, especially those outside of gun forums such as THR. Point is, like any other issue, to those not in the gun communities, their perception IS their reality.

Case in point... I have a friend I introduced to shooting recently who was nervous about firing my AR because of what he had heard on TV- ie it was a very powerful and abnormally dangerous weapon. After firing it he even laughed and said what a 'joke' the recoil was.

I will bet a dozen Krispy Kreme's that many here have had a similar experience. All I am saying is those who have the power to shape other's reality have a responsibility to get the facts straight and be unbiased, which has been FOX's stated mission all along.

I just think they veer off their neutral political course now and then.
 
:eek:

No no no!

The M4 is most definitely not a "heavy battlefield weapon"!

It's an "assault rifle". That's what it is.

And it really, really, really isn't a "battle rifle"!

How do I know these things with such unshakable, almost religious, certainly?

I've had certain folks here educate me on the error of my ways.

I see the light.




:neener:

::now where'd I put that stick I use for flogging deceased equines?::
 
Fox News is more "balanced" than other cable or MSM media but that doesn't make them any more knowledgeable about firearms.
Another thing I hear which has contradictions is that these can fire @800 R.P.M., but other sources said they are getting semi auto versions.
Which is true?
I don't know -- and I really don't care; but it goes to show how "precise" and "accurate" our TV media is.:uhoh::scrutiny::banghead:
 
It's just a constant misuse of terminology, to create "news". Same as calling a 22 caliber auto, an automatic weapon, they do it all the time, some are just ignorant, and some are knowinglly looking to sensationalize the story.
 
LAPD- North Hollywood shootout-1997/ M-16a1 5.56mm

This big CPD/M-4 news story reminds me of when in 1997, after the LAPD/North Hollywood shootout, the LA city govt and Police commission finally allowed LAPD patrol officers to get rifles; the weapons the LAPD bought and displayed to the LA media were old, used CA national guard M-16a1 5.56mm rifles, :rolleyes:. I used a beat up old M-16a1 in my military training and know how poor they are compared to the A2 models or even better a SIG or HK or Beretta rifle. But $$$ is the only thing some police chiefs/elected officials care about, not the safety/welfare of the LAPD officers, :mad:.

It's a lot like all the media press the new LAPD/SIS Kimber .45acp pistols have got. The LAPD SIS unit was "covert" for many years. The SIS members worked undercover and were not listed in any LAPD budgets or rosters. Why the SIS would allow Kimber to go on and on about these new .45acp pistols is also beyond me. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top