Detroit Free Press Columnist Says Gun Debate Over
Detroit Free Press columnist Rochelle Riley recently wrote that the time for gun control debate is over. She says it is now time for a serious national discussion about who can buy and keep a firearm. I’m not sure what Riley means by discussion. I suppose she thinks we all now agree with her position because of recent illegal shooting that have taken prominence in the news.
Riley says it is time to stop using the 2nd Amendment as an excuse to be dangerous. I disagree. The 2nd Amendment isn’t an excuse, it is a Right that many people of the world don’t have. I have a Right to own a firearm for protection, for recreation or for whatever reason I want. Firearm ownership doesn’t make someone dangerous, actions make someone dangerous. For example, most of us use our automobiles for transport. But on occasion, someone will intentionally use their vehicle to kill someone. At other times, vehicles accidently kill. By Riley’s logic, we need to have a national conversation about automobile control to keep vehicle out of the hands of someone who is dangerous. Read more
NY Times Article Looks at Elderly and Guns
It seems that the Old Gray Lady is just gunning for guns any way it can. How else do you explain an article that looks at guns and the elderly? The paper adds, quite deep in the article however, that there are “few reports of elderly gun owners shooting relatives or caregivers,” the article addresses the possible concerns.
Yes, this is an issue, just as much as how elderly individuals with dementia and other mental problems shouldn’t be driving or possibly living alone, but this seems to be yet another case where the media can take fire at gun owners. So should we be surprised that The New York Times chose this time, as the gun debate is hotly in the news, to come out with this one sided article?
We say one-sided because one aspect that seems to be missing is a counter point. While the article does address dementia and other issues, it fails to note that some elderly individuals do indeed need guns to protect themselves, such as Mr. Otis McDonald of Chicago. The paper also ignores the fact that many of today’s elderly men fought in World War II and as such certainly know to handle a gun with respect and confidence.
Starbucks Asked to be Left Out of Gun Debate
Good for Starbucks for not wanting to be in the middle of debate on whether customers should be able to carry guns while getting their coffee fix. The company offered this take according to The Associated Press:
”Coffee chain Starbucks Corp. is sticking to its policy of letting customers carry guns where it’s legal and said it does not want to be put in the middle of a larger gun-control debate.”
While the company offered this opinion, we still think we’ll be hearing from the anti-gun zealots.
ABC News Throws Bias in Gun Debate Story
When is a news story really an opinion piece? In our opinion – no pun intended – it is anytime an argument is made that supports one side of the issue. ABC News did a pretty good job in a story about the gun ban debate raging at Colorado State University. How else do you explain this bias that begins the story:
“Every campus shooting – including the one 11 days ago at the University of Alabama – reignites the debate over whether students and faculty should be allowed to carry concealed guns into college classrooms. Most colleges already ban the practice, but one of the last holdouts in the country, Colorado State, is just now finalizing plans to ban firearms on campus.”
In a news story there shouldn’t be this type of one-sided introduction. In fact, this type of intro is more suited to a straight up editorial. We’d like to ask whether every shooting in the country, campus or otherwise, really reignites the debate. First, does the debate every really cool down, and why is only in times of tragedy that this issue is brought up?
In fairness, the second paragraph is less biased:
“That is not sitting well with many students who argue that a full ban actually puts them in more danger.”
But the way this story is crafted, it brings up the shootings first, suggesting to the reader that Colorado State is wrong – the article does call the university a holdout after all. This is a simple writing tactic, where the author can shift opinion with just a few words – proving the pen (or keyboard) is mightier than the sword.
