I can't believe this was published in a Kentucky paper!

[andy29075]

Lead quote: "The assault rifle a man pointed at two Lexington police officers early Monday on Arbor Station Way was more than dangerous, gun experts say."

Hi all,
I'm usually not surprised at the genuine ignorance of firearms function and nomenclature (and oft-found biases against them) by members of the news media, but this one just takes the cake, especially coming from such a firearms-friendly state, and I thought you should read it for yourselves...

http://www.kentucky.com/211/story/463322.html

(Note: I believe the officers acted appropriately; my sole concern is with the firearms-related ignorance and bias of the story's author)

A quick recount of mistakes:

1. "semiautomatic assault rifle" -> contradiction in terms
2. "It is capable of rapid fire" -> most fingers (and their owners) are capable of this with most any firearm
3. "Rayburn has collected guns for more than 25 years and had a permit." -> who needs a permit to collect? Is it a CWP, C&R, etc??? (This is KY, not NY)
4. "anyone can purchase the rifle, which is sometimes used for sport, such as target practice" -> It naturally follows that the remaining majority of them not used for sport have been known to shoot innocents with no human intervention required...
5. "The Bushmaster XM15 assault rifle... looks intimidating, and it's powerful." -> While my WWII-era Garand has a wooden stock and a bit more kick....

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

The author's contact info is listed at the bottom of the article, should someone with more patience feel encouraged to comment directly to the author.

 

[Bowman140]

Sadly, I am not suprised. For some reason the media always has to put a negative spin on anything gun related.

 

[22-rimfire]

semiautomatic assault rifle" -> contradiction in terms

This is actually correct as the proper military definition is a firearm with selective fire capabilities. The anti's have defined "assault rifle" as being a semi-automatic.

The article seems pretty neutral to me. And a so called assault rifle pointed at you IS more than dangerous. So is a Model 700 Remington in 30-06.

Rayburn's "permit" was a CCW permit. The rifle is capable of rapid fire.

Expert: "He could have taken them both out'

The title was selected for shock value. But it is true. The important thing is he DIDN'T. He was shot for brandishing a firearm in an aggressive manner and not obeying the police instructions. You don't wave guns in front of police officers and expect no reaction.

 

[nalioth]

semiautomatic assault rifle" -> contradiction in terms

This is actually correct as the proper military definition is a firearm with selective fire capabilities.

You can't have a "semiautomatic assault rifle". That's like saying "The corpse was alive."

It's either a selective fire assault rifle, or it's a semiautomatic clone or 'sporting rifle' or whatever...

 

[bogie]

Campers, when you try to explain to a reporter the difference between a semi-rifle and an assault-rifle, their eyes glaze over.

That means you just lost their attention, because they think you're a kook.

Reporters deal with a LOT of kooks.

Your best strategy is to come across as a non-kook.

Which means "don't get munged up with the definition crap, and go for the core of the story."

In this case, the real question is: How did the critter get the gun?

 

[Henry Bowman]

I think the real question is: Who are these "gun experts" and what, exactly, did they say?

 

[Picard]

I wrote him an email. You guys should do the same, it only takes a minute.

 

[sarge83]

It was in the Lexington Herald Leader, enough said. This socialist rag makes the NYT look like National Review.

To bad Kentucky doesn't have a decent newspaper. Between the liberal Louisville Courier-Journal and the Lex. Herald Leader anyone wanting to read just the news in the paper doesn't have a chance in KY.

 

[myrockfight]

To bad Kentucky doesn't have a decent newspaper. Between the liberal Louisville Courier-Journal and the Lex. Herald Leader anyone wanting to read just the news in the paper doesn't have a chance in KY.

I was thinking along the same lines sarge.

I am from Kentucky and my first thought was "which paper is this from?"

 

[bdickens]

:banghead:

No wonder we have such a hard time! All the flaws in logic and all some of you boneheads can do is get caught up in minutae like the definition of "assault rifle" and "clip" vs. "magazine!" Who cares? Joe public sure doesn't!

 

[carlrodd]

forget the lack of knowledge in regard to terminology etc....the whole article reads like it was written by a typically bad college reporter pretending to be a legitimate journalist. i love how the 'experts' know equally as much nothing as all the others.

 

[Picard]

All the flaws in logic and all some of you boneheads can do is get caught up in minutae like the definition of "assault rifle"

The use of language is extremely important. The whole Clinton gun ban was passed because of the made up term "assault weapon". People instinctively feared them without knowing a single thing about them. It is a scary term because it means absolutely anything and everything that a politician wants it to mean.

I hope that more people are learning the truth about these terms but it is still fooling many Americans, especially those who think that the 2nd Amendment is only for hunting and sporting purposes.

 

[googol]

That article was about as gun-neutral as you're going to get in a mainstream media newspaper. There were no downright errors in fact and no discernable bias. By getting all foamy at the mouth over minor points of word usage only confirms the stereotype of the raving gun lunatic.

Chill out and save your outrage for something worthwhile. Like the black helicopters.