MSNBC Has Front Page Story Confirming Gun Control Doesn't Work

[Safetyhit]

Too often we complain about the unfairness and the fact that the media often refuses to cover anything that doesn't fit its socialistic worldview. And that's true. But, when they do something right, we ought to let them know so that (hopefully) they'll keep doing it.

An excellent idea. I will follow your lead.

[Brook724]

The same author wrote two more articles on concealed carry:

Utah, Florida help non-residents pack guns

22 minutes for a concealed-weapon permit

Despite my best journalistic efforts at impartiality, I was amazed at how easy it was to obtain the license and nonplussed about the lack of a training requirement.

But I know for a fact that when I applied for my Washington State Concealed Pistol License, I had never fired a revolver or semiautomatic handgun of any caliber. Not once. In fact, I had never even held a loaded pistol in my hands.

I don't find either article to be particularly favorable towards gun rights.

[Magic_Salad0892]

He is right though.

It's not a page against concealed carry. It's being non-biased. Admit it.

It's really easy to get a CCW.

The reason that most of the time they don't end up in the wrong hands is because most people who apply know what their getting into.

They know if they're capable of taking the shot, and that their intentions are good.

[Rider79]

I wouldn't really call the article pro-gun rights at all, it just made us look like less than the assholes they usually portray us to be. Here is where the article went downhill:

Helms’ friends and relatives were left to mourn, barred by the same Castle Doctrine from filing a civil lawsuit.

[Safetyhit]

Here is where the article went downhill:...

That wording wasn't great, but I'd say it was mostly overshadowed by the rest of the article. Especially the headline stating how gun deaths are down as permits are up.

[Shadow1198]

.32 caliber handgun kills robber? Who wudda thunk it?!

Good to hear though, esp on MSNBC.

No see, the bullet didn't kill him, it was the laughter of being shot by such a puny caliber.

[skyugo]

We all read that report and think it is great news. An anti could read it as being on their side:

1. Hollow-point bullets, he must have been planning on killing someone
2. One shot in the front, two in the back. He was trying to flee and was gunned down.
3. A human being was killed and the police didn't even ask questions!
4. Economic justice was breached as the family cannot sue the homicide of their bread-earner, and I'm sure honors student.
5. The Homicider shot the young man, even though his gun was trembling. The assailant was as afraid as his prey.
6. "burgeoning movement" doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement.

An anti could read the same report and see it as a call to action.

true, though the bottom line is that the robber initiated the armed confrontation. when you pull again on a group of innocent people you're really lost all legal protection to not get shot. Obviously i'm preaching to the choir here, but i think most people with the ability to think clearly can and do see it that way.

[demarne]

I think MSNBC did a fairly good job about just giving objective facts, however I can see how FAR FAR lefties would interpret incorrectly and say that shooting the robber was not needed and the situation could have been avoided.

I think what the citizen did was justifiable since the robber was pointing a gun at him and threatening him.