Imagine if Media Treated Gun Rights Groups Honestly

By incorporating volatile terms including “gun violence” and “high-powered assault weapons” into their reporting, are the media telling a story or selling a particular viewpoint?

When some deranged individual stabs people, why isn’t that reported as “knife violence?” Does anyone in a typical newsroom know that common deer hunting rifles use ammunition that is far more powerful than ammunition used in a typical 5.56mm NATO semi-auto modern sporting rifle?

When was the last time a newspaper or broadcast report identified the National Rifle Association, which has tens of thousands of certified volunteer firearms safety instructors in its ranks, as a “gun safety group?” That designation is typically used in reference to gun control organizations such as the Brady Campaign, Everytown for Gun Safety or Moms Demand Action on Gun Sense in America.
FROM HERE

This entry was posted in Gun Control, MSM. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Imagine if Media Treated Gun Rights Groups Honestly

  1. Bert says:

    Media are worse than child rapists and, as a profession, are worse than whores.

  2. NITZAKHON says:

    There’s a reason I call them the ENEMEDIA. As a (fellow politically-conservative) Jew I know says: “First against the wall after the main shooting stops”.

  3. Gator says:

    They actually DO call it ‘knife violence’ over in Europe. Gun control is a given, they’ve already got the law abiding disarmed, so there’s no need to bother talking about it. Since Africans and Muslims can’t stop stabbing people, now they want to take away the knives. So, knife violence.

    An honest media would raise the question of why a demographic that makes up 13% of the US population is responsible for 50% of violent crimes and focus on that rather than the instruments they use, but we ceased having an honest media decades ago, if in fact we ever did.

  4. Jonathan says:

    They do it with any cause they don’t like – for example, they denigrate the Pro Life movement as ‘anti-choice’ and ‘anti-women’ while ignoring the thousands of women killed or maimed by abortions every year.
    The support the claim that there is no motive when Moslems kill people, and if pressed they will concede that there are crazies in any population, but they are absolutely, instantly sure that all White people are to blame for an attack POSSIBLY carried out by a white person… and they will photoshop pictures and invent new terms (like ‘white Hispanic’)to support their position.

    I don’t trust them and am finding that I can’t have a coherent conversation with anyone who does.

  5. bogsidebunny says:

    I don’t own an “assault rifle”. I possess a PDW (Personal Defense Weapon).

  6. cap'n fast says:

    I question the assault weapon term for a tripod mounted belt fed water cooled weapon as was described by the News some time ago. weapons designed as strictly defensive weapons cannot be used in the assault unless vehicle mounted.Hmm. M-18A1 claymores strapped to the front bumper of a car. harsh on the chrome, but stolen anyway. yeah that would be an assault weapon.
    Read about a interesting assault weapon the Russians thought up during the great war. large dog trained to fetch red ball. dog carried five kilos of HE with a trip fuse attached to a lanyard. throw the ball past the herms, when the dog reaches the herms, stop the lanyard and bang. assault weapon.
    I have heard a flare pistol described as a assault weapon. screw the media twits.

  7. FaCubeItches says:

    Whining that your enemies don’t treat you nicely is really pretty dumb.

Leave a Reply to Gator Cancel reply