NY Post Reports on Fast and Furious but Mislabels Firearms
We’re glad to see that the mainstream media is starting to cover Fast and Furious, but unfortunately it means more erroneous reporting on so-called “assault weapons.” This week The New York Post offered this type of misinformation in a story titled, “Sheriff blasts AG over gun bungle,” noting:
“The thousands of high-powered assault rifles and other military-style firearms, which were bought with taxpayer dollars, ended up in the arsenals of deadly drug gangs in Mexico.
Again, as we’ve long reported, this isn’t accurate reporting. Assault rifles are technically not “high-powered” at all. These fire an intermediate cartridge, meaning they use a small bullet (cartridge) than most true high-powered hunting rifles. But as we’ve noted, the adjective “high-powered” only makes the guns sound more dangerous and thus ominous.
Media Misinformation: Reasonable Gun Control
To hear the anti-gun crowd talk everyone should want “reasonable gun control.” This is a phrase used by anti-gun groups such as the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. It is used by the politicians who want to see the assault weapons ban reinstated, it is used by those who want to make reasonable gun owners seem unreasonable and therefore dangerous.
What is reasonable gun control? Is it calling for a national registry? To some this seems reasonable – but it would likely mean that a grandfather couldn’t pass his rifle down to his grandson, at least not without a background check, adding to an expense to the family. That seems reasonable to those calling for reasonable gun control.
Is reasonable gun control banning all military style guns because they look like – but do not operate like – a military firearm? Is it reasonable to ban an item from private ownership because it looks dangerous? It seems reasonable to those calling for reasonable gun control.
Is reasonable gun control adding a waiting a period and lengthy background checks? There are already instant criminal background checks, but the waiting period could make people decide it isn’t worth the bother, and worse could put those in high-crime areas with lots of criminal break ins and home invasions at higher risk. That seems reasonable to those calling for reasonable gun control.
No, what is reasonable is to understand that law abiding citizens have rights provided by the Constitution, and yet some think this isn’t right. So who is really the “unreasonable” one?
Huff and Puff Story Includes Usual Misleading Information
In a piece titled, “AFT ‘Fast and Furious’ Operation: Inside The Controversial Gun Trafficking Investigation,” the Huffington Post offered some typical media misinformation:
“Also, gun shops in Texas, California, New Mexico and Arizona are now required to alert the ATF to purchases of two or more high-powered rifles in a five-day span to help agents spot suspicious buying patterns.”
This is not true. Gun shops in Texas, California, New Mexico and Arizona must report sales of firearms greater than a .22, so the use of “high-powered” is flat out wrong. This continues to be the biggest media lie – even surpassing that infamous 90 percent number that we’ve tracked for so long. But this reporting is not only misleading but could be confusing to those looking to buy intermediate powered rifles!
Media Misinformation: High Powered Assault Weapons in the News
Clearly the words “high-powered” are just going to be used in stories about assault weapons. This shows a continued media bias and just plain sloppy reporting.
This week CBCNews from Canada offered this passage:
“Details emerged at the hearing Tuesday about how agents in Arizona allegedly lost track of nearly 2,000 handguns and high-powered assault weapons.”
The Daily Mail from the UK noted in a story about weapons from a Mexican Cartel:
“They show more than a dozen assault-style rifles and a shelf full of handguns, along with crates of bullets.”
And even National Geographic, in writing about a very tragic story of poaching, misused the adjective:
“The poachers keep pouncing practically daily, shooting the helpless animals in state and private parks, often using high-powered assault rifles.”
Clearly, this just shows how badly the mainstream media understands firearms. It again is sloppy reporting, and suggests a bias against guns. It presents a view that these weapons are something more than they actually are, and as we’ve long noted, this trend will likely continue as this latest batch of stories proves.
Media Misinformation: Assault Clip
One new term has shown up that the mainstream media seems determined to use. This of course is “assault clip,” a term coined by Paul Helmke, outgoing President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Helmke coined this phrase following the tragic Tucson shooting from January 2011.
It was used so often that the mainstream media has accepted this term, despite the fact that prior to Helmke’s usage it was never actually uttered. The sad truth is that it is just a high-capacity magazine, but here is the twist – in addition to labeling this an “assault clip,” Helmke also noted that all magazines that hold more than 10 or 12 shots are in fact “assault clips.”
Suddenly this wasn’t just about a 32-round pistol magazine, but became about every high-capacity magazine, and yet the MSM has done a fabulous job of never actually making this point clear. In fact, the MSM has jumped on the band wagon.
BuffaloNews.com Story Offers Sinister Gun Description
Even when the media doesn’t try to be anti-gun biased, it remains very much so. Case in point this week, a story in BuffaloNews.com had the headline, “Machine gun and drugs seized in arrests of two.”
That sounds like a good thing; criminals with a machine gun and drugs deserve to be arrested. But the problem is that the story doesn’t actually say what type of machine gun OR if there was in fact a machine gun. What is noted is that there were “two high-powered assault rifles, including a defaced AK-47.”
So the media misinformation continues. As we regularly note, assault-rifles are NOT high-powered. But this makes for good copy and sounds more sinister, thus another example of the media being very anti-gun biased without even trying too hard.
Media Misinformation: Assault Clips
There is an old saying that if you tell a lie enough it becomes the truth. But what if you make up facts and state it enough? Is that the same thing?
Apparently that is what the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence hopes by labeling high capacity magazines, as in any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, as an “Assault Clip.” This phrase only dates back to the post-Tucson shooting from this January. Prior to that there was no such thing as an “Assault Clip,” despite the fact that high capacity magazines have been around for years.
The truth is that there is still no such thing as an “Assault Clip,” because it is merely the invention of vocabulary of the Brady Campaign. The purpose is clearly to suggest to the uniformed that these clips are only designed for the purposes of an assault, an attack or some other military need.
This is a myth that needs to be dispelled. While it was noted that Jared Loughner used a high capacity magazine we’re left wondering why millions had been sold but yet we don’t see similar incidents. The truth is also that the Brady Campaign wants to ban “Assault Clips,” and if the next shooter has a magazine that holds only nine rounds, they can say, “well, now that is too many,” until there are no magazines at all.
Media Only Tells One Third of the Story
The tragic killing of a federal agent in Mexico last month is being used by the media to advocate new gun control laws. One of the weapons used in the ambush murder of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jaime Zapata and the wounding of his co-worker was a Romanian made Draco 7-62, legally bought at a Fort Worth gun show. The buyer, Otillo Osorio then allegedly resold the weapon illegally to drug dealers.
What we aren’t hearing from the media is that two other firearms were used in the ambush and have yet been traced. It is possible that these firearms may have come from a source outside the United States.
Osorio and his brother Ranferi were caught with dozens of guns with the serial numbers filed off, so the other two weapons may have been purchased in the United States but this hasn’t been verified yet. The F.B.I. is good at tracing firearms sold in the U.S. and has excellent techniques that can lift a serial number, even after it appears to have been filed off.
Most of the media hasn’t mentioned that two weapons were used in the crime but haven’t been traced. If one or both are traced to a gun show sale it is almost certain that the media will jump on this to advocate closing down gun shows. But if they can’t be traced, or are traced to another country, it is almost certain we won’t hear about it.
Media Misinformation: Gun Show Loophole
This one comes up time and time again, the nefarious “gun show loophole.” This has been in the media a lot because of the unfortunate shooting in Tucson, followed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s so-called “sting” in a subsequent gun show.
But what is exactly the “gun show loophole?” To hear the media talk, it is essentially a failure of the system where criminals, the mentally ill and others who shouldn’t legally be allowed to buy a gun, so easily obtain one. The argument is that guns are sold without background checks and therefore anyone can buy a gun at a gun show.
The truth is that this isn’t technically inaccurate. Individuals who are in the business of selling guns as dealers can in fact get a table at a gun show and sell as private individuals. No license is generally needed. This is thus private sales of guns. And this is where the point gets tricky. Read more
Media Misinformation: Military Style
This one goes hand in hand with “assault rifles,” but the mainstream media loves to add the adjective “military style” in front of assault rifles. As we noted with assault rifles, it is a matter of looks being deceiving. Can anyone say what “military style” even means?
To ban military style rifles would be akin to banning military style clothing. No tall leather boots, no camouflage, no uniforms, etc. That sounds downright silly, doesn’t it? But the truth is that it is just as silly to talk about banning “military style” weapons because the word “style” actually says a lot. Read more
