Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing about.. yes, kind of a gun thread.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing about.. yes, kind of a gun thread. Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing abou... - 8/23/2015 8:16:03 AM   
MercTech


Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline 		A case coming before the Supreme Court is to consider the question of whether stun devices have second amendment protections.

The odd thing I noticed was that when the Washington Post reported the story; they used a picture of a firearm (a taser - yes they are classed a firearm) instead of a pocket stunner as many other media outlets.

Hmm, clueless journalists or intentional FUD sowing?

Wawshington Post article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/08/11/are-stun-guns-protected-by-the-second-amendment/

ArsTechnica Article
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/08/you-have-the-right-to-bear-arms-but-what-about-electrical-arms-or-stun-guns/

The classification of stunners itself deserves some discussion but the glaring difference in the Washington Post using a picture of a firearm (tasers use gunpowder to propel wire attached needles) over an article about stunners (hand held shock devices) just jumped out at me.
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/23/2015 11:09:18 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

A case coming before the Supreme Court is to consider the question of whether stun devices have second amendment protections.

The odd thing I noticed was that when the Washington Post reported the story; they used a picture of a firearm (a taser - yes they are classed a firearm) instead of a pocket stunner as many other media outlets.

Hmm, clueless journalists or intentional FUD sowing?

Wawshington Post article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/08/11/are-stun-guns-protected-by-the-second-amendment/

ArsTechnica Article
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/08/you-have-the-right-to-bear-arms-but-what-about-electrical-arms-or-stun-guns/

The classification of stunners itself deserves some discussion but the glaring difference in the Washington Post using a picture of a firearm (tasers use gunpowder to propel wire attached needles) over an article about stunners (hand held shock devices) just jumped out at me.

The press is often ignorant about the things they cover, it is just that as a general rule they are more ignorant about firearms than most other subjects so it is easier to catch them in the mistakes.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/23/2015 12:39:40 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline 		Two different things. A stunner is for close range and requires contact, a taser can be used for short range or shoots up to 15 feet and is thus...a firearm.

HERE

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 8/23/2015 12:41:56 PM >

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/23/2015 11:41:16 PM   
stef


Posts: 10215
Joined: 1/26/2004
Status: offline 		Knowledge about the subject they're covering is not a requirement for journalists. These were made as a joke but they're not very far off from what gets reported these days.





_____________________________

Welcome to PoliticSpace! If you came here expecting meaningful BDSM discussions, boy are you in the wrong place.

"Hypocrisy has consequences"

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/24/2015 10:09:59 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

Knowledge about the subject they're covering is not a requirement for journalists. These were made as a joke but they're not very far off from what gets reported these days.





Actually I have seen worse reporting, and not just recently.
When I was based in Ca in the 70's I saw a piece on the theory that they found both .38 and .22 slugs after the Bobbie Kennedy killing.
The press was upset because while they showed them all the slugs, they wouldn't tell them if some were .38s. They showed the slugs, all were clearly the same caliber.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to stef)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/24/2015 10:36:34 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

A case coming before the Supreme Court is to consider the question of whether stun devices have second amendment protections.

The odd thing I noticed was that when the Washington Post reported the story; they used a picture of a firearm (a taser - yes they are classed a firearm) instead of a pocket stunner as many other media outlets.

Hmm, clueless journalists or intentional FUD sowing?

Wawshington Post article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/08/11/are-stun-guns-protected-by-the-second-amendment/

ArsTechnica Article
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/08/you-have-the-right-to-bear-arms-but-what-about-electrical-arms-or-stun-guns/

The classification of stunners itself deserves some discussion but the glaring difference in the Washington Post using a picture of a firearm (tasers use gunpowder to propel wire attached needles) over an article about stunners (hand held shock devices) just jumped out at me.

I think you give them more credit than most of them deserve.. few are real Journalists in todays news world... people have to learn that just cuz its called "news" or appears in a newspaper doesnt mean that the "news" is accurate at all.. you need to read these stories with many grains of salt..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/24/2015 10:50:56 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline 		Should check out video games, if you want to see just how clueless mainstream media is at news reporting. Years ago, when 'Mass Effect' was released, FOX 'news' had problems with just one place in the game's story line: the 'sex scene'. Spoilers....

Yes, there is the hints of having sex but no actual sex is observed. There is kissing and hugging, which is no different from soap operas during the day. And that scene comes once 95% of the game has been executed. The 'journalist' could not understand how computer games could tell a story. The game 'Half Life' told a story about some guy being late to work one fateful day....

Even in bdsm, mainstream journalists get things wrongs.

The problem is two fold:

A ) Journalists are not as informed on subject material as they once were demanded of (by their employers and the public)
B ) The public has been dumb down below a 8th grader's understanding and maturity level.

Those two have to be improved upon if 'we the people' are to get a better source of information.

Yet, we have that better source of information: NPR. Its dull, its boring, its like watching grass grow. But it does produce much in the way of good journalism that is rich with details; for an audience whose educational level is above a 10th grader's. Since it is not heavily polluted with political agendas and bullshit; most conservatives and libertarians do not watch it. In fact they often hate it, since it forces them to use that lump three feet above their heads for something besides a paper weight!

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/24/2015 12:18:59 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Yet, we have that better source of information: NPR. Its dull, its boring, its like watching grass grow. But it does produce much in the way of good journalism that is rich with details; for an audience whose educational level is above a 10th grader's. Since it is not heavily polluted with political agendas and bullshit; most conservatives and libertarians do not watch it. In fact they often hate it, since it forces them to use that lump three feet above their heads for something besides a paper weight!

You're kidding, right?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2011/03/22/science-settles-it-nprs-liberal-but-not-very/

NPR Admits It's Packed With Liberals by Mike Gonzalez
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/16/earth-tax-dollars-npr.html

http://bernardgoldberg.com/no-liberal-bias-at-npr-just-ask-npr/

http://www.cjr.org/news_meeting/does_npr_have_a_liberal_bias.php


(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/24/2015 12:25:57 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Since it is not heavily polluted with political agendas and bullshit; most conservatives and libertarians do not watch it.

You're kidding, right?

NPR Sucks

K.


(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing ... - 8/24/2015 12:44:43 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Yet, we have that better source of information: NPR. Its dull, its boring, its like watching grass grow. But it does produce much in the way of good journalism that is rich with details; for an audience whose educational level is above a 10th grader's. Since it is not heavily polluted with political agendas and bullshit; most conservatives and libertarians do not watch it. In fact they often hate it, since it forces them to use that lump three feet above their heads for something besides a paper weight!

You're kidding, right?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2011/03/22/science-settles-it-nprs-liberal-but-not-very/

NPR Admits It's Packed With Liberals by Mike Gonzalez
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/16/earth-tax-dollars-npr.html

http://bernardgoldberg.com/no-liberal-bias-at-npr-just-ask-npr/

http://www.cjr.org/news_meeting/does_npr_have_a_liberal_bias.php



Not loaded with political agendas = they have the same political agenda he does.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 10
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Some Jouranlists aren't sure what they are writing about.. yes, kind of a gun thread. Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078