CNN’s Roland Martin Calls to “Whack the 2nd Amendment”
In an editorial Roland Martin, CNN political analyst, takes aim at the issue of the illegal aliens, and how this relates to the 14th Amendment. He tries to imply that those on the right are looking to repeal the 14th Amendment completely, and he goes on a tirade of sorts, in which he suggests that we “whack the 2nd Amendment.” But we don’t think he’s joking, or just trying to make a point. He seems to be one of those out there liberals that seriously believes that this amendment has to go. Read more
NBC Chicago Says Brady Endorsement of Pat Quinn “Matters”
In an editorial for the Ward Room for NBC Chicago, Edward McClelland not only explains why it “matters” that the Brady Center has endorsed Illinois Governor Pat Quinn but sums it up in a way that makes it clear that Pat Quinn is probably bad for Illinois. Read more
Texas Capitol Building Offers Gun Lane
The Associated Press, and other mainstream media news sites, are reporting this week on how the Texas State Capitol building allows visitors with legit gun permits to enter through a fast lane, which actually avoids metal detectors.
Among those carrying guns reportedly is Governor Rick Perry, who had rejected that the building install metal detectors.
Of course we’ve already seen that some groups are questioning the move, with the AP quoting the Brady Center as saying the policy was “ludicrous.” But we say that instead of being ludicrous this shows that law-abiding citizens can be armed without essentially turning every corner into a Wild West shootout. As the news story notes, some permit holders believe that they are the ones least likely to pose any threat. Let’s see how the media reacts to this story!
Fourth of July Editorial From Brady Center Misses the Mark
If you believe the word from The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the United States leads the world in gun related homicides. In a misplace Fourth of July editorial, which appeared on the Tauton Daily Gazette website, the Brady Bunch offered this thought:
“On this Independence Day weekend, as Americans reflect on the history of the nation’s founding and contemplate its future, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has released the latest edition of its God Bless America poster, documenting that, in one year, guns murdered 17 people in Finland, 35 in Australia, 39 in England and Wales, 60 in Spain, 194 in Germany, 200 in Canada, and 9,484 in the United States.”
Where is Afghanistan or Iraq on this list? While maybe a very different picture of “gun homicides,” we question why these nations weren’t included? What about other wartorn nations in Africa and Asia? Why aren’t those nations included? Many experience violence every day? This is because those nations lack the freedom of the United States?
Where does China rank on the list? In China it is a capital offense to even be caught with a gun, yet gun violence happens. In Mexico it is hard to legally obtain a gun, yet here too we see regular violence that is all too common.
No, the picture that the Brady Center offered is not a good one of the United States, but it isn’t a fair one either. Are those deaths really because we have guns however, or because we have a criminal element? That’s the question that isn’t being asked enough.
Voice of America Offers Strange Take on SCOTUS Ruling
This has been a crazy week for reporting on guns following the SCOTUS ruling. But Voice of America has the strangest voice on the matter. It offers some choice quotes from only one side of the issue:
“Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said he expects criminals convicted of gun charges to use Monday’s ruling to challenge their convictions.”
Either we’re reading this wrong, or Voice of America is reporting this wrong, but does this even make sense? What does the ruling about gun ownership have to do with criminals? If someone broke the law, they broke the law.
And Voice of America also had a choice quote from Chicago Mayor Richard Daley:
“I don’t think America should be known for ‘we could kill more people than any other nation.’ We love to kill, we can kill overseas, we export more guns than anybody else, and we buy more guns than anybody else, and ammunition. That should not be known as a great country.”
Mr. Daley doesn’t speak for all of us obviously. We can respect that all Americans should have a right to decide what makes us a great country, but Daley is flat out wrong when it comes to the facts on the issue. While it is true that the United States is a large exporter of small arms, the United States is not even in the top five of small arms importers (source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute). India, Singapore, Malaysia, Greece and South Korea are the world’s largest arms importers at the present time.
Maybe Mr. Daley and Voice of America should do a little more fact checking.
Brady Bunch Against State’s Rights?
Does it sound like the Brady Center Against Gun Violence really wants reasonable gun laws? It certainly doesn’t seem that way to us, as the group is now going after states that it disagrees with, reports The Great Falls Tribune:
“The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed written arguments in U.S. District Court in Missoula, asking that the Montana Firearms Freedom Act be struck down as unconstitutional. Among the groups joining the Brady Center were Montanans Against Gun Violence, the Montana Human Rights Network and the International Brotherhood of Police Officers.”
This is extremely worrisome to us. The law was passed in Montana but the Brady Bunch is making this a District Court matter. So much for state’s rights!
Coverage of Machine Guns in the Bay State
Journalists should be able to write both sides of a story, and do some in an unbiased way, so it is interesting to see some recent coverage of legal machine gun ownership in Massachusetts. The Boston Herald ran two features on the subject, with O’Ryan Johnson contributing to both. The first story, titled “Pls slow to target machine guns,” offers a look at both sides of the issue – noting that an eight-year-old boy was killed at a machine gun shoot.
The Herald’s take on the issue of fully automatic gun ownership including information from about new bill from Governor Deval Patrick, “An Act to Reduce Firearm Violence.” The paper noted:
“a controversial overhaul of the states gun laws that would limit firearm purchases to one per month and ban anyone who is not a cop or the licensed owner from holding a machine gun.”
The paper did not note how difficult it is to buy or collect machine guns, and included some sources quoted that would suggest otherwise, including this passage from Public Safety Secretary Mary Elizabeth Heffernan:
“In Massachusetts, it should not be easy for people to get a machine gun license.”
The paper also included this highly biased quote from Daniel Vice of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence:
“I think people would be surprised to know that several thousand fully automatic weapons are in civilian hands.”
Yes, this might surprise people, but so would it surprise people that obtaining a machine gun isn’t as easy as going into a gun store like in the movie The Terminator. Worse, the papered injected some bias when describing Vice, with the authors noting that Vice “said illegally trafficked semi-automatic handguns pose a greater public threat.”
What does this have to do with the main story, and doesn’t this actually suggest that machine guns aren’t a problem? On the flip side, O’Ryan Johnson also wrote a piece about collectors of machine guns titled “Many collect for fun – and value.” So not all bad news from The Herald.
Boston Globe Complains that Obama Hasn’t Followed Through on Gun Control
Finally, an editorial we like… sort of anyway. James Alan Fox of The Boston Globe ranted and raved that President Obama hasn’t followed through on one particular promise – that being gun control. While most of Fox’s rant is about the sale of illegal guns by licensed gun dealers, he offers this statement:
“Importantly, this is not a call for dismantling the Second Amendment or for infringing on the rights of legitimate gun owners.”
It is very hard to believe him when he also notes that the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence graded the President’s performance on gun-related matters with a “big fat ‘f.’” In other words, he seems to be allied with a group who would like to have all guns banned, and thus anything he says has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Opposing Views Doesn’t Oppose Lying About Numbers
Earlier this month the Brady Bunch issued a news statement that was picked up by Opposing Views, and it contains the typical type of scare tactic information that we’ve come to expect and loathe. When discussing gun violence in Mexico, the article offers this tidbit of information:
“American gun sellers supply the cartels with virtually all of their guns — between 95 and 100 percent.”
Can we get a fact check on that number? Not only is that not accurate, but it seems the American mainstream media just accepts this as fact.
Worse, the Brady Center, along with Opposing Views, sees the solution for solving another country’s problem is to deny American citizens their Second Amendment rights. In other words guns should be banned in the United States because Mexican criminals might use them.
Is the Media Really Causing the Controversy?
Channel 13 WTHR ran a segment, and Web story, that suggested “New gun law already causing controversy,” but isn’t this a case where the mainstream media’s coverage of the law is just fueling the controversy? The reporter noted:
“The law will let you bring your gun to work, as long as you keep it in your car. Indiana is one of 11 states to allow guns in workplace parking lots, but the debate is, ‘Does the Second Amendment trump the rights of property owners?’”
What is the big deal here? If you park your car on the street it isn’t on workplace property? And if it is locked in the car what, we ask, is the big deal? Would someone with thoughts of doing harm follow the law anyway? This is just another case there the lawmakers, and those who loath firearms, must just assume criminals consider these points. The fact is that a criminal probably doesn’t care. Of course the issue is being twisted. Note this argument from the Brady Bunch:
“‘I’m disappointed that Indiana has adopted this legislation. Basically, they are saying their version of the Second Amendment trumps private property rights,’ said Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign.”
Well, Paul, wouldn’t it be argued that the vehicle is private property? Are you saying that the employer has the right to look in your vehicle at any point without your permission when it is parked in the lot?
