Does NBC New York Reporter Believe in Checking Facts?
There is a role in the media called a “fact checker” but strangely it seems many firearms related stories in the mainstream media just accept anything said by anti-gun types as a “fact.” Case in point, this week NBC New York offered a story on how this weekend a commercial will run featuring Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City and Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston – who happen to be the founders of Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
Here is what we are talking about:
Bloomberg asserted the (recent) shooting (in New York City) made clear the importance of gun control. He added: “We had too close a brush with death tonight due to illegal guns.”
And the figures prove he’s right. Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne told me that about 85 percent of the gun crimes committed in New York City result from gun purchases made in Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, “states with comparatively lax gun laws.”
First question, where does Paul Browne get his information? And more to the point, how do the figures prove Bloomberg is right? This number is widely cited, but without a source. Second, what numbers of those are legal vs. illegal gun purchases? In other words, are these even legal purchases that take advantage of “lax gun laws” in the first place? This point is never made clear and is often very vague. Not exactly the facts now are they?
But the facts get even more twisted:
John Feinblatt, the Mayor’s chief policy adviser, told me that states with tough gun laws are unlikely to be the source of illegal guns. He noted that, in fighting gun crimes, two measures are vital: having universal background checks for gun sales and putting all such data in the FBI files. In the case of the Virginia Tech massacre, in which 33 people were killed, the gunman, Seung-hui Cho, had a mental history that indicated he was dangerous but , Feinblatt said, that was never passed on to the FBI. Some state laws on gun sales, he added “have loopholes like swiss [sic] cheese.”
Again, this is twisting the message and points. Seung-hui Cho’s ability to get a gun wasn’t because of lax gun laws, but rather a failing in the mental health system. But what “loopholes” are like “Swiss cheese” exactly? Would this be private sales? Even in New York private sales are legal, provided both parties have licenses to own the firearms.
But another point we’d like to make on facts. States with tough gun laws may not be the source of illegal guns, but it is hard to know for sure. Illegal guns aren’t exactly tracked the way commercial sales are tracked, so this is somewhat a vague point. It is clear that guns do change hands in New York and Illinois – as there is gun violence. Clearly an illegal black market operates and no amount of gun bans or gun control is going to destroy this black market. But that’s a fact that really pushes the issue – is it Mayors Against Illegal Guns or just Mayors Against Guns, because the way these guys talk it sounds like the latter.
Mayors Against Illegal Guns Goes to the Super Bowl
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino will reportedly appear in a pro-gun control ad during the Super Bowl. Of course this publicity stunt is occurring as New York and New England’s teams appearing in the big game.
It should be noted that the 30 second ad will cost some $3 million dollars – so anyone who says that the NRA pushes its pro-gun message unfairly should consider the money that these super rich anti-gun zealots are throwing at their cause.
But let’s consider some too some of the media coverage so far.
The New York Times: “During Super Bowl, for 30 Seconds, 2 Mayors Will Be on Same Side,” which offers this passage:
The half-minute ad features Mr. Bloomberg and Boston’s mayor, Thomas M. Menino, ribbing each other as they cheer for their respective teams and cities. But then they turn to the purpose of their spot, declaring that one thing they agree on is the need for stricter federal gun control laws.
The New York Post: “Mayor Bloomberg to run anti-illegal gun ad during Super Bowl”
The Associated Press via The Wall Street Journal : “NYC, Boston mayors team up in gun-control ad”
All this is interesting in the way it suggests it is about “illegal guns” and how the mayors are “teaming up” and are “on the same side,” but never notes that this is against what many gun owners want. Of course do these rich anti-gun zealots care.
It should be noted that the ad will only appear in select markets and not nationally due to rules on “cause related” ads.
Mayor Bloomberg Calls Out Obama on Gun Control
For us this is a lose-lose scenario, but at least we’re not the ones losing. This week, prior to last night’s State of the Union, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg called out President Obama on gun control. It was the usual nonsense, about “loopholes” and supposed “easy access” for criminals to obtain guns. The truth is that all the measures Bloomberg wants only make it that much harder for the law abiding.
But anytime one sleazy politician calls out another we think an angel get wings! Bloomberg’s Letter After the Jump
KnifeRights.org: Knife Rights vs. Boston Knife Bigots
The hearing in Boston last Friday on the proposed anti-knife ordinance “Providing For The Licensing Of Stores That Sell Certain Knives” was a TOTAL FARCE!
We’ve coined the term “knife bigots” to describe these councilors, and others, who simply hate our freedom and our tools and staged this farciful hearing as part of their effort to railroad through this ordinance. Read more
KnifeRights.org: Boston Proposes to License Knife Sales Restricting Your Second Amendment
KnifeRights.org:
As we warned, this Thursday, September 8, 2011, the Public Safety Committee of the Boston City Council will be holding a hearing with the intention of licensing the sale of knives in the city of Boston.
Below is the official stated purpose of the hearing:
That the appropriate committee of the Boston City Council hold a hearing to examine requiring the sale of knives to be licensed by the appropriate police agency that would monitor, regulate and license businesses selling knives. Representatives from the Boston Police Department, Inspectional Services Department, and other interested parties shall be invited to attend.
The meeting will be at Boston City Hall, Ianella Chambers, 5th Floor on Thursday, September 8, 2011 at 10 am. Read more
Globe Says New England Shouldn’t Choose Between Gun Making and Gun Control
There is an irony in New England, it is a region where our nation essentially was born – and yet it is a part of the country disconnected from modern America in terms of attitude and opinions. It is also a bit bi-polar at times. The Boston Globe showed this in a recent op-ed piece noting:
“NEW ENGLAND has a centuries-old tradition of both gun manufacturing and gun control. It shouldn’t have to pick between the two. However, at least one manufacturer is trying to force the matter. Proposals to require that guns be made suitable for micro-stamping, a technology which would allow shell casings to be traced back to the exact gun they were fired from, have been introduced in the Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts legislatures. These have drawn significant criticism from gun manufacturers, at least one of which, Colt, is threatening to move out of New England if such legislation is adopted.”
The issue here isn’t so much that the people of New England want their right to keep and bear arms preserved as much as they want to keep Colt in New England for the jobs and revenue it brings in.
The paper sees it differently:
“Massachusetts has had gun-control laws for almost three centuries, and the Connecticut River Valley has been a center of gun-making since George Washington established an armory in Springfield. There is no reason that both gun control and gun manufacturing cannot co-exist for the next few centuries as well.”
The truth is that the cries for gun control are on the rise, and in the end this could hurt Colt’s bottom line. Why should it provide jobs and revenue to a state or region that wants to kill it slowly?
Boston Globe Offers Surprising Non-Biased Gun Article
Maybe the arrival of summer has shinned some light on the folks at the Boston Globe, as the paper offered a story this week titled, “Bills will punish gun owners, advocates say.” The article offered this passage:
“Critics of stricter controls on gun ownership and purchasing blamed black market transactions, Mexican drug cartels, and even the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives for enabling criminals to access guns without licenses, and they argued that any additional oversight could put gun ownership out of reach for lawful citizens.”
Could the media actually be coming around on this issue?
Stop Handgun Violence Puts Up New Billboard
The Boston Globe reported this week that Stop Handgun Violence has put up a new 250-by-20 foot billboard along the Massachusetts Turnpike near Fenway Park. It includes a digital counter that display the number of American children and teens killed by guns daily.
However, as noted in the story, the counter will simply increase by eight every day – since that is the statistical average. It won’t take into account those killed in gang related activities or as the result of crime. In other words a gun is bad no matter how it is used.
This is also not exactly a new billboard, and it seems that John Rosenthal had put anti-gun messages since 1995. He reportedly said that 200,000 commuters see the billboard every day. His new target is the Republican controlled House of Representatives, and he accordingly sees last November as the turning point – however, it is worth noting that the GOP didn’t actually take power until January, but can you really reason with people like Rosenthal on these points?
The Globe also noted:
“Past messages on the billboard included a mock ransom note from the NRA, declaring, ‘We have your president and Congress,’’ and another that announced, ‘Welcome to Massachusetts — You’re More Likely to Live Here’’ because the state has ‘the most effective gun laws’ in the nation.”
That latter argument is totally lost on us. The most effective gun laws in the world don’t matter to criminals. Consider that Washington, D.C. and Chicago had so-called “effective gun laws” and terrible gun crime. The point remains that criminals don’t stress over gun laws.
Boston Globe Misses Some Points on “Background checks for gun show”
This week The Boston Globe noted that “Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino… called on US Senator Scott Brown to support a bill in Congress that would require background checks for sales at gun shows, in an attempt to slow the flow of illegal firearms into Massachusetts.”
The Mayor is quoted in the story claiming that Massachusetts has “the strongest gun laws in the nation, but people go down South and buy these guns at shows. There’s no background checks. That’s wrong, and we’ve got to stop that.”
The article has an interesting bit of information too:
“Menino’s office cited a 2010 report that found that 64 percent of illegal guns recovered at Massachusetts crime scenes originated out of state. The greatest number of those firearms came from New Hampshire, followed by Maine, Florida, Georgia, and Vermont, according to the report by Mayors Against Illegal Guns.”
What the article fails to note is that Menino is the co-chair and one of the founders of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, hence he is citing his own group’s study.
The article also notes a bill in the U.S. Senate:
“The bill, co-sponsored by Democratic Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, would require background checks for all firearm purchases, including private sales at gun shows and through the Internet. Federal law currently only requires background checks by licensed gun dealers.”
This is a little misleading. Internet sales require all purchases to be sent to a Federal Firearms License holder, such as a local gun shop, and this does involve a background check.
The key again is “private sales” and while this notes “private sales at gun shows,” the next step would be all private sales. That would essentially create a national database anytime guns change hands. But the question is how would this would?
Would everyone have to register their existing guns? The answer has been no, but somehow we don’t believe it.
Antique Derringers Lands Collector in Hot Water
The Boston Globe, among other outlets, is reporting that 44-year Brent Cameron of New London, New Hampshire is in serious trouble with the TSA.
It seems that Mr. Cameron tried to pass through security at Boston’s Logan International Airport with two vintage .22-caliber Derringers that he had bought at an auction. Apparently Cameron forgot they were in the bag, which is not really much of an excuse. It was noted that he had no ammunition for the guns.
What is troubling about this story is that he was arrested for “unlawful possession of a firearm.” This apparently because he did not have a license for the guns, which is required in Boston. This is yet another example of where gun owners face penalties for merely trying to travel with their guns.
