Alphecca

Weekly Check on the Bias

The temperatures are rising. The Sun is higher in the sky. Plant stalks are growing up-up-up. Orioles are heading North. The Yankees are headed South. But enough waxing poetic...

Welcome to the May 10th edition of the Weekly Check on the Bias of media regarding firearms and the Second Amendment. This week's photo was sent in by reader Roger D. to show me that my cat isn't the only one well armed:

Well, just when you thought you'd heard all the rhetoric over the new law in Florida re-inforcing a citizen's right to defend themselves from mutants, along comes a story by Jacqui Goddard from the Christian Science Monitor which was reprinted a day earlier in USA Today. And if that last sentence confuses you, all I can say is it was a time-travel thing... Anyway, the article starts off with the (unfortunate) shooting of a 16-year-old playing a prank. This anecdote has become the "poster boy" of the anti-Castle Doctrine law. The fact that such occurrences are so rare compared to justified armed defenses shows that it really shouldn't be used by reporters UNLESS they also point out that the new law still requires that residents who do meet "force with force" pass the test of what a reasonable person would do. Sadly, this one doesn't. Alas, she DOES quote the Brady Bunch rather a lot:

This law "worries me terribly," says Sarah Brady, chair of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "This is just a license to kill."
[...]
Ms. Brady believes that far from making sense, the new law provides gun owners a legal screen behind which to hide during confrontations and "threatens to enable every rogue with an itchy trigger finger." "It's a terrible precedent," she says. "I am sorry that Florida had to be a test-ground, but I think what has gone on there should be a wakeup call for the rest of the country to stand up and fight this."

And then, a shameful, gratuitous paragraph:

Brady - whose husband, former White House press secretary Jim Brady, was left disabled after being shot in the head during the 1981 assassination attempt on President Reagan - speaks as a victim as well as a campaigner. "This law isn't a deterrent, it sets a terrible precedent. At ballgames, in bars, on the streets, this is going to endanger the lives of innocent folks and put them in the line of fire, just like my husband was," she says.

I say "gratuitous" because Jim Brady was not shot as a result of being mistaken for a burglar or rapist or for committing any other criminal act. Therefore, why bring him up at the conclusion of the piece? It is "shameful" to suggest that this law would legalize assassination attempts, as Sarah Brady seems to imply. Such quotes indicate a serious question of bias on the reporter's part.

Oh sure, there are the usual quotes from the NRA. Actually, there's the usual bashing of the NRA that we've come to expect in any gun-rights story emanating from the Monitor. It's all a plot by the NRA:

Now the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) has chosen Florida to launch this latest gun initiative, in hopes of once again taking its campaign nationwide. Consequently, lobbyists on both sides are gearing up for a national fight.
[...]
Florida seemed an obvious target for the NRA as a launchpad for such legislation. It has long been a supporter of more rights for gun owners...

And so on. You'd never read such innuendo regarding other lobbying groups such as the NEA, the Teamsters, AARP, et cetera. Not even for trial lawyers. But liberal journalists love to bash or tar the NRA and their liberal editors let them get away with it.

Speaking of Florida, when a gun maker gets the chance to be interviewed by the press, moderation might be the order of the day. From the St. Petersburg Times:

There's no sign on its front door. The place is unobtrusively tucked in a row of auto body shops in a no-frills industrial park next to the Veterans Expressway in Town 'N Country.

Nothing would tip you off that, behind that unmarked door, local entrepreneur Mark Serbu and his crew are manufacturing powerful .50-caliber rifles, right on the edge of what's legal.

"This is the biggest, baddest gun you can buy without a special license," said Serbu, 43. "It's like having control of lightning in your hand."

It's clear that the journalist is skeptical of the legitamacy of the firearm but "edge of what's legal" is just plain hooey. Either it is or it ain't, and in 49 states -- it is. But the owner, Serbu, doesn't help the cause with allusions to harnessing "lightning". That's just going to scare the crap out of folks reading the article who might not be supporters of an unfettered Second Amendment.

Look, it's great to be enthusiastic over the products you make but handing out quotes like that is red-meat for those in other states whom would like to ban such guns.

Carry-on in North Carolina might be the title of a story from the News-Record:

On one side of the debate stood gun rights advocates, those who said police couldn't be relied upon to always protect citizens. Firearms could.

Then there were the anti-gun forces, opponents who predicted violent street justice and vigilantism run amok.

North Carolina's concealed-handgun law, which passed the General Assembly a decade ago this summer, ended the state's longtime ban on carrying hidden firearms. But contentious debate over its effects remains unsettled.

The National Academy of Sciences in December called for more research. Several studies throughout the years appear to validate both sides of the issue.

While experts debate the merits of concealed handguns, this much is known: a News & Record analysis of thousands of state records shows proponents made at least one accurate prediction -- those who receive permits follow the law.

One-tenth of 1 percent of all permits issued since the law's inception have been revoked. Though the State Bureau of Investigation declined to release what led to revocations, local law enforcement officials say most weren't because of crime.
[...]
They once called themselves North Carolinians for Gun Control. That changed a few years back when organizers renamed the group the North Carolinians Against Gun Violence Education Fund.
[...]
"We made (North Carolina's) concealed-carry law more strict than it would have been," said Lisa Price, the organization's executive director. "In some states, almost anyone can get a concealed-carry permit."

Ten years ago, Price and gun opponents lobbied against the law's passage. Today, she said, it's harder to support the argument of potential street violence that critics once used to oppose the law.

There are some nonsense quotes from others, including Yale law professor John Donohue -- whom I've written about before -- but the meat of the article comes from three stories of ordinary people deciding to arm themselves or in one case scaring off a rapist. In fact, the author of this piece, Eric J.S. Townsend, seems pained to find any REAL controversy over the law allowing concealed-carry in the Tar Heal State. Again, no blood running in the streets...

Meanwhile, in Minnesota, the (Twin Cities) Pioneer Press rarely shows any support for gun rights but they are backing range-rights:

Earlier this week, the Senate Judiciary committee hammered out what we think are some common-sense proposals for the regulation of gun ranges. For those of you living in the city center, this has been an ongoing and increasingly intense battle as the suburbs push from the outer ring into formerly rural communities.

For the record, we have no more sympathy for people who live next to and want to close gun ranges than we do for those who live next to a pig farm or in the flight path of an airport. Frankly, it's not like most folks buy their houses one day and the offending sites just pop up the next. Our point was made in Thursday's Pioneer Press and the front-page story by reporter Alex Friedrich.

"When they have (shooting) meets, it's unbearable," said Grace Axelson, who lives within 100 yards of the Bald Eagle Sportsman's Association, a gun club in Hugo. That's all well and good until you realize that the club has been there since 1957.
[...]
As we noted in a November editorial, the Legislature has proposed a set of national standards that are measurable and protect gun clubs from unsubstantiated claims by angry newcomers who wake up one day to discover — GASP — that there's a gun club in the neighborhood. Opponents have also made hay of the fact that the National Rifle Association developed the standards. We don't agree with the NRA on everything, but as with gun safety, they're pretty much the experts on running gun clubs.
[...]
Indeed, reasonable people can disagree over concealed carry and assault weapons, but this legislation seems right on target.

Hey, I've knocked this paper in the past and it's only fair that I pat them on the back for a good editorial.

Damn-Fool Police Chief. A depressing story of a gun collector who had a Massachusetts carry permit. His jacket blew open in the wind and a cop saw his holstered gun. So what, right? The cop let him go (apparently you can't open carry?) and that should have been the end of it. It wasn't. The Daily News reports:

While the officer let Landers go without an arrest, the Adams Street resident soon after received notice from Dedham Police Chief Dennis Teehan that his Class A license to carry firearms had been revoked due to the incident.

Landers, a Vietnam veteran with no criminal record, said he was crushed by the letter, which he saw as an attack on his credibility. After serving as a Navy engineer on a submarine from 1966-1971, he'd always been interested in collecting historical war artifacts such as guns, uniforms and other items. Landers said he never planned to use his gun and he was not risking public safety by carrying the weapon on his person.

But Teehan saw things different. The chief said he was "troubled" by the 1998 incident in which an officer spotted the handgun on Landers and resulted in a "negative" police report.

"I have always erred on the side of caution when issuing a license to carry firearms," Teehan said in a 2001 letter reaffirming his denial. "For this reason, I find it necessary to deny your request for a license to carry."

Teehan did not return calls last week inquiring about the case.

Worse, by loss of the permit, Landers is now prevented from owning recent vintage firearms. All because of a gust of wind and a blow-hard cop. Teehan is an ass and I'm glad the Daily News decided to report this story. Even those Massachusetts residents who don't support the Second Amendment ought to see the unfairness of Lander's plight.

Dept. of How It's Done: I always like to end with one of these stories. From Columbus, Ohio:

A homeowner shot a burglary suspect early Thursday morning at his own home on the city's west side, according to the Franklin County Sheriff's Office.

The homeowner said two people kicked in the door and entered the living room of his Volney Avenue home at about 12:40 a.m. The resident said he feared for his safety and shot at the burglars twice, striking one of them in the upper torso.

The unidentified suspect was found a short distance from the home and was transported to Mount Carmel West Hospital. The suspect was listed in stable condition.

The other suspected burglar was not found.

One mutant down, so many more to go...

I'll be live on Cam's NRA News later today. The show starts at 3 (Eastern) and I'm usually on about 3:20. You DO listen every day though, don't you? You should!

Thanks for stopping by!

Posted by Jeff Soyer at May 10, 2005 08:23 AM