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

[Left Sig]

Seems like a reasonably well balanced article. But how could they write and edit it with n mention of John Lott, who has done the most exhaustive studies on legal concealed carry. They quote a public health guy from Harvard. Take a wild guess where his bias will be?

[QuietShootr]

Hard to believe, but there it was. Right on the homepage no less:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714389/ns/us_news-life//


Record numbers now licensed to pack heat
Firearms deaths fall as millions obtain permits to carry concealed guns


By Mike Stuckey
Senior news editor
msnbc.com
updated 8:43 a.m. ET, Wed., March. 24, 2010

snip

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

.

Anyone who attempts to file a lawsuit against someone for killing their criminal ****tard relative should be euthanized on general principles.

[CGSteve]

Best part is that the robber is from Eddison NJ...

What a dumb a$$... had he commited the crime in NJ, he would be alive today since NJ will not give out CCW permits. lol But no, the retard went 600 miles south to commit a crime and die.

Since we can't defend ourselves here in NJ, I would love to see more of NJ's violent criminals meet their maker at the hands of free citizens in other states.

Awesome!

Truth. Stay safe across that bridge.

[perna]

haha poll is 78.4% to 18.1, the anti gun people are so entertaining and it is clear they either did not read the article or just read "gun" and flip out.

[Safetyhit]

Anyone who attempts to file a lawsuit against someone for killing their criminal ****tard relative should be euthanized on general principles.

No doubt about it. Nothing worse than hearing some loud mouthed, expletive frothing moron on the news yapping about how their POS relative was such an unfortunate victim.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

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.

[rifleman2000]

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.

It is fairly obvious that the writer of the report was more or less objective. If a reader CHOSE to stretch and interpret the article that way, then nothing can stop them. The point is that the article is fairly well balanced, but as some of the poll comments show the rabid anti-gunners still fail to compute anything except guns are bad.

[maximus83]

It is fairly obvious that the writer of the report was more or less objective.

Absolutely. That, and the fact that the writer Mike Stuckey is a "Senior News Editor", are the real causes for celebration here. FINALLY, someone in the media who will simply report the facts. Not "my facts", not "your facts", just objective facts. There are such things as facts, they are damn stubborn, and PRAISE GOD, occasionally they get through to the light of day, despite all our human conniving, politicizing, etc.

My opinion? We should all blitz MSNBC with polite emails, sincerely thanking them and specifically the writer Mike Stuckey. NOT because they wrote a story whose "slant" we agree with, but because they published the objective facts. 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.

[rifleman2000]

My opinion? We should all blitz MSNBC with polite emails, sincerely thanking them and specifically the writer Mike Stuckey. NOT because they wrote a story whose "slant" we agree with, but because they published the objective facts.

This is an excellent idea.

[RogerinTPA]

excellent story ending! Another log on the fire.