NEWS 20/20, Face The Nation & 60 Minutes

Status
Not open for further replies.

TokenGimp

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8
Did anyone else watch these three news shows? Each of them had nothing less than biased anti-gun agenda. I watched in dismay all the mis-information in the three stories this weekend and wish I'd had them all on DVR so I could go point by point through the stories and counter their attack on the truth and the 2nd amendment.
Beginning Friday night ABC's 20/20 had a report with really stupid examples of gun usage, ignorance and access. To me it expressed the need for more firearm education for young people not less familiarity. Whenever there is the potential for young kids to come in contact with firearms be it by accident or choice then they need to know what to do with it. What if they find a gun in a park where a gangbanger tossed it? It was clear the kids on the news story either never held a real firearm or were told what to do with them so as to look extra foolish. Also the artificial attacks set-up were not any type of real life example; when you have a highly trained officer rush into a room fired at newly trained kids, most of whom had no prior firearm experience what out come did the expect? It was not a news story, but an anti-gun, anti-constitutional, anti-American commercial. The examples were clearly inflammatory and absurd, but unfortunately much of the general public does not recognize when they are being fed a bill of goods. It was a clear attack against ownership and an attempt to sway public opinion by use of yellow journalism.

Then on Sunday morning TV the CBS program FACE THE NATION with Bob Scheiffer had Mexico's Ambassador complaining about all the guns coming from America into their country, where again false and ambiguous allegations about the types of guns going to the drug lords and not where they are really coming from like China, Russia, Venezuela, Argentina and Israel and no doubt some from America. But because they can't control their borders and got upset because we wanted to secure the borders to stop the flow of illegal drugs and immigrants now we are supposed to change our laws? Bob Scheiffer who normally does a good job, didn't press him. Bob lobbed up slow pitches and allowed Ambassador Arturo to respond and it looked like he was doing the bidding of our new President. He failed to mention many of the firearms used by the drug lords including the 50 caliber rifles were sold to the Mexican government by our Government to fight the war on drugs, but due to corruption many of the guns were sold or stolen from their Gov't and given to the drug lords.
Lastly was 60 minutes again making some one-sided allegations and assumptions trying to influence anti-gunners with their stories. They did allow a couple comments from a positive aspect of gunrights, but not equal time. They had the same kid that bought guns on 20/20 talking and he said on that show he paid $100 extra to buy a gun so he didn't have to show ID, but on 60minutes he said it was only $15.00. Of course he was able to buy the same type Glock pistol that killed his sister on the 20/20 show, but on 60 minutes he bought a more powerful version of the same Glock. While I'm sorry he lost his sister to an illegal gun owner, lying to obtain his agenda will not help his cause and further hurts honest gun owners.

I have Stats put together by an Anti-Gun group that shows more deaths during the assault ban during Clinton years, but the number of deaths dropped after GW Bush was elected and more folks were able to obtain CCW. Death by suicide is a number that need to be removed for gub death stats since most people who choose to kill themselves might use any means available if no gun is available. People wanting to hurt other may do just the same with a car by driving through a crowd. Not to mention twice the number of people killed by autos compared to guns each year.

If you haven't already, please join the NRA https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp

SAVE $10 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MRjNVqdcPU (worth watching).

Or any pro-gun group you feel can make a difference in addition to

I wrote all the Senators last week and received a response from our Sen. Amy Klobuchar from MN. It says she's for more laws. I have also responded with comments to each of the three news programs noted above.

An NRA Lifetime Member
 
This topic is under at least 200 different threads currently running here, not that I am given to hyperbole.

That having been said, apparently you and I watched a different "60 Minutes" presentation. The one I saw was equally balanced and provided the gun community with not only an ample opportunity to make its case but also presented an individual who more eloquently stated the case and cause that did anyone on the other side.
 
I was satisfied with the 60 Minutes footage that I saw online through a link posted here today. Sure, you gotta sit through the bovine fecal matter that is spewed by a few bureaucrats, but I think our side was given adequate airtime to swat down those myths and fantasies.
 
What I find disturbing, though, is that this "news" is completely contrived.

There is no news here.

Mexico's ambassador wants to blame everyone but Mexico for Mexico's problems. No news there.

There are violent drug gangs in Mexico. No news there.

People can buy guns in the US. No news there.

The Obama Administration comes from the school of thought that America is inherently bad, and to blame for nearly all of the problems in the world, even those that predate the US by a thousand years. Again, no news there, for anyone who pays any damn attention!
 
The problem with the 60 Minutes piece was that they made the claim that "assault rifles" should be banned, as if banning them were the just, right, and obvious thing to do. They should clear bias in that regard. They made no effort to show any opinions or facts as to why banning them might not be the right thing to do, which is just plain old bad journalism.
 
news 60 minutes

To Searcher451, I'll agree the guy from Virginia running the show certainly made a better case for our side, but we may have to disagree about balance of content. If I can watch it again online I'll try and look through fresh eyes rather than someone who had already seen two negative firearm stories during the weekend. In my opinion fear mongers will only see that anyone can buy a gun of anytype, anytime and anywhere they want legal or not. Even my mother who owns guns of her own and is a former security guard at a men's State prison now living in AZ has the opinion as do many of her peers that the border issue is our fault. They notice because they can't go south across the border for affordable meds and dental care. Peace.
 
The problem with the 60 Minutes piece was that they made the claim that "assault rifles" should be banned, as if banning them were the just, right, and obvious thing to do.

I don't own any assault rifles. I own a couple of SKSs and an AR-15. These are not assault weapons. I sure wish people would start getting this right. If we call them assault rifles, that makes it sound like the other side knows what they're talking about. Let the other side get it wrong.
 
TG: Fair enough, and we may have to agree to disagree when it's all said and done. That's fine, too.

I taped the thing while watching it live, given the chatter that was going on here beforehand, and then watched the tape a couple of times afterward. I came away with the conclusion that both sides got to have their say, which was refreshing. And no question that our guy was better than their guys. Sure, some of the stuff from the anti-side was over the top and/or silly, but they got to say what they wanted to say, just as we got to say what we wanted to say. That's balanced coverage, and it's all you can ever ask when push comes to shove.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top