Who is "Jansen Jones"?

[driver8M3]

any chance that the slant was caused by ignorance --- not by bias?

the "ignorance" seems to always cause the slant to be in the same direction...that makes it look more like bias.

[Nik Habicht]

I didn't mean to offend you

Eric,

Not to worry --- I've known you long enough not to get offended. I did want to throw out another take on the whole situation.....

[Nik Habicht]

It's not necessarily malicious, but with deadlines, editorial constraints, etc., it seems sometimes that the facts tend to play second fiddle to just getting some copy on paper. Does that make sense?

Troy

Yes, it does. And sometimes I think it's coupled with an arrogance that keeps one from asking follow-up questions, lest one appear less than perfectly intelligent......

[Nik Habicht]

the "ignorance" seems to always cause the slant to be in the same direction...that makes it look more like bias.

Looks can be deceiving though --- unless one's a conspiracy theorist. If you'd talked to me fifteen years ago, I probably would have argued for gun control. Why? Because I was truly uninformed --- and didn't know that I was uninformed. There's a dearth of readily available literature on the pros of gun ownership --- and on the responsibilities that come with the rights. It took me a while to find Ayoob's and Paxton Quigley's books --- and they more than anything else convinced me that I could --- and more importantly should --- expand my knowledge of lifesaving skills. We all need to do a better job of getting our point across.....

[tightloop]

Eric

I feel the same way you do most of the time...but I am making a concentrated effort to find the positive in all things...also working within the system to effect change to show the positive side or at least both sides of the case in question...

You can't let the turkeys get you down or you will never soar with the eagles..

[driver8M3]

If you'd talked to me fifteen years ago, I probably would have argued for gun control.  Why?  Because I was truly uninformed --- and didn't know that I was uninformed.

one can be both uninformed and biased. how come you wouldnt have argued against gun control back then instead of for it? what led you to feel one way over the other? could it be that pretty much all you had been exposed to was the liberal rantings of the major tv networks and newspapers?

15 years ago, i was also uninformed...and biased, because my opinions (political, etc) pretty much came from what i heard on tv.

[rhino]

I used to be uninformed and biased (against guns) too. All it took was an open mind and some facts and now I'm ... well, you guys know how I feel!

COLD ... thank you very much for joining us and clarifying what happened in the article! From the way it was written, I had a strong feeling that you had been misquoted, so that's why I chose to contact you and ask!

And welcome to the Forums. In my opinion, this is the best online forum period, and we talk about shooting and guns too!

[Nik Habicht]

If you'd talked to me fifteen years ago, I probably would have argued for gun control.  Why?  Because I was truly uninformed --- and didn't know that I was uninformed.

one can be both uninformed and biased. how come you wouldnt have argued against gun control back then instead of for it? what led you to feel one way over the other? could it be that pretty much all you had been exposed to was the liberal rantings of the major tv networks and newspapers?

15 years ago, i was also uninformed...and biased, because my opinions (political, etc) pretty much came from what i heard on tv.

driver,

really simple: I couldn't conceive of being willing to injure another human (much less being willing to potentially cause another's death) and therefore couldn't see a reason why anyone would need to own guns, given that food is available at the grocery store and the world is pretty civilized. Before you all start --- I was 23 at the time. Nobody had threatened my life, my parents were always available as a safety net, and I'd repressed any inkling that there are two footed predators in the world.

Fast forward eight years or so and I've had my life threatened a few times; covering the murder of Megan Kanka started the process of dealing and healing from being molested as a kid, and I've had stretches of living from paycheck to paycheck that would have made a hunting license really appealing --- in short I grew up and started asking questions. At 23 I wasn't reading a daily paper or watching much news --- my influences on guns were more likely to have come from school and family. My parents lived through WWII in Germany, they had little interest in guns. When I was a kid and playing cowboys and indians with my cousin, my grandfather once screamed at us to stop playing with toy guns. I didn't get it at the time --- but he'd fought in France in two world wars --- I'm sure it shaped his attitude toward guns.

None of those family influences had a particular anti-gun agenda --- they were simply shaped by seeing the destruction that wars spew forth and had no desire to do have anything to do with killing ever again. I can respect that.

Ayoob and Quigley and Duane Thomas, to a lesser degree early on, showed me that there was another side to the issue. Want to eliminate the bias that many have against guns? Educate them. You'll run into people who's minds are made up, people who'll see your point but decide that guns are not for them, and some you'll turn into shooters. Either way, the shooting community will be better off.

[EricW]

TL,

On the glass half-full side, the Internet is really changing everything. Would an anti-gunner come here and get a bad impression of shooters? Very doubtful. Plus...now, for under $100 a year, I can spread my message to the entire free world totally unimpeded by the liberal censorship that we have endured for the last few decades. The times, they are a changin'....

I will also reluctantly admit that, I too, was very anti-concealed carry in my youth, even though I was always an avid hunter and shooter. I thought those with CCW's were just people looking to kill somebody. The answer as to why has already been elucidated here.

[Duane Thomas]

I guess I'm the odd man out, here. I've always been pro-gun. I was always fascinated by guns, especially handguns, from very early on. It was just always a given in my life that, once I was old enough to buy my own guns, I'd get seriously into it. And once I could get a concealed carry permit, I'd start carrying. What can I say? I was probably warped by reading Jeff Cooper at an early age.

[Larry White]

Duane is not the odd man out here. I can't say I've always been pro gun, but never been anti, they were just always there. I didn't become pro until I learned some were anti. I too read Cooper. But I think Jordan was the one for me. God bless this country and the people and guns that won it. And bless the people and guns that will keep it. Larry

[tightloop]

that is what makes America great...you can do our own thing long as it doesn't hurt anyone or is against the law...

so give them media people Hell, buddy...

[John Dunn]

but I am making a concentrated effort to find the positive in all things...also working within the system to effect change to show the positive side or at least both sides of the case in question

He really IS Mr. Sunshine!

Sorry, couldn't resist!

[Sam]

BTW, I know a great many "nationally ranked" shooters. Some are ranked "D" class, but ranked nationally and even internationally, nonetheless.

The collective message of our news media and our governament can be summarized in the immortal repetive line from the movie "A Christmas Story".

"You'll put your eye out!"

Everyone seems to have a good reason for lying to me. It's for my own good! If they have to twist someone's words to save me, then that's a noble cause to lie for.

Well, Aunt Tillie, it's been 36 years since I got my evil hands on that first BB gun you begged my Pa not to let me have. Now, me and my buddies have graduated to running with loaded assault weapons. And guess what? Nobody's lost an eye yet. Well....(spit).....I'm a callin' you a liar!

I plan to live to a ripe old age and then die in a spectacular mushroom cloud ball of fire that people will talk about for years. Then some old biddy can say. " See, I told him so."

[tightloop]

John,

don't say it too loud it will spoil my rep....

[eerw]

EricW..

I'll throw in late here...like Nik..I am in a newsroom..my experience in a newsroom is that most people don't know a lot about anything..they, at best, might know a little about everything..

much gets lost because they don't understand, pressure from editors to simplify information and to keep stories short..

there are definitely those out there with agendas..and those are the ones that must be found and called upon for the lies and mis-truths..

but for the most part..they are kids, with no life experience and no knowledge..

you should see the blank stares when I get on a soap box and explain the difference between semi-auto and full auto, magazine and clip, rifle and shotgun..

I try and tell them and my staff..you may do great things in the world..but it is all about details..it's all in the details..

[Vince Pinto]

I guess I'm the odd man out, here. I've always been pro-gun. I was always fascinated by guns, especially handguns, from very early on. It was just always a given in my life that, once I was old enough to buy my own guns, I'd get seriously into it.

That makes two of us. Before he emigrated to Australia and met my mother, my father was a Carabinieri (Police) in Italy, and he was an avid shooter, so guns were always part of my life as a child.

However the main thing my old man taught me was responsibility. If anything bad happened with the gun, it was my fault - not the gun manufacturer's fault, not the ammo manufacturer's fault, and certainly not the fault of the guy at the sporting goods store who sold the stuff to me. And Dad only had to give me one genuine, 1950's, politically incorrect (by today's standards) Mother Of All Ass Whippings (and then some), for me to understand my responsibilites when it comes to guns (and everything else under my direct control).

My primary gripe with the media today is the way they fuel the "pass the buck, and let's make a few bucks in the process" mentality of suing other parties for personal failures.

[Jim Norman]

I grew up shooting. I fired my first gun at the age of four. I started shooting at a local gun club when I was about 11 and I got my first gun for christmas when I was about 12. I still have it. Remington 513T. I had to lengthen the stock to get the 2" my father shortened it by back.

I remember taking a failing grade in 7th grade "Social Studies" because I refused to argue for gun control (1967)

My daughter is following in my footsteps. She has shot her first gun at age 4, and already has her own rifle now, age 7.

Start early educating the youth of today so that we have our rights tomorrow. Do you know a kid that would like to shoot, but his/her parents don't? Offer to teach them, obviously with the parents permission and present. Take them out and use reactive targets, (Coney Island stuff) it keeps up the interest. Transition to scorable targets and teach safety above all else. You may be surprised to find the parents joining in.

Jim

[smokshwn]

Stu and Nik

I respect the efforts you both seem to make in your arena to correct the problems of modern journalism. However given that most jounalists "know very little about everything" my issue comes into play when those who know very little about the subject take it upon themselves to simplify the explanations and statements of the knowledgeable. Most of the journalists I have been exposed to through my position as a Public Info Officer for my department have such an inflated sense of superiority and intelligence over their readers/viewers that they feel it their duty to simplify the info for the "dummies". In my experience this is where much of the misinformation/bias/agenda pushing etc. comes into play.

[oddjob]

Years ago (1997) I was involved in a shooting where my partner got shot (he's OK)and I killed the suspect. Pretty clear cut, but the paper (Sacramento Bee) stated that my partner was a victim of "friendly fire" (me, since I was the only other person that fired EXCEPT the suspect and my partner). There was absolutely no facts that back up that statement, but it was printed anyway. I have learned that the "truth & facts" mean nothing to the press as long as they have their "moment". I realize that this was just one reporter and I really shouldn't paint them all with one brush (unlike them IDPA shooters.......just kidding people), but it really does piss one off if when crap like that gets printed. Oh well.....live and learn.........

[Nik Habicht]

Most of the journalists I have been exposed to through my position as a Public Info Officer for my department have such an inflated sense of superiority and intelligence over their readers/viewers that they feel it their duty to simplify the info for the "dummies".

Yup, some give off that impression don't they? Journalism classes suggest that one should assume that a significant part of one's audience might only have a sixth grade education. I was appalled by that statement --- until I remembered that everyone I meet every day might be a reader. I took the statement to mean "stay away from $20 words, when you can use 25 cent words," not that one should dumb down the concepts one's trying to explain. I suspect it's different for some of my colleagues....

[Nik Habicht]

Years ago (1997) I was involved in a shooting where my partner got shot (he's OK)and I killed the suspect. Pretty clear cut, but the paper (Sacramento Bee) stated that my partner was a victim of "friendly fire" (me, since I was the only other person that fired EXCEPT the suspect and my partner). There was absolutely no facts that back up that statement, but it was printed anyway. I have learned that the "truth & facts" mean nothing to the press as long as they have their "moment". I realize that this was just one reporter and I really shouldn't paint them all with one brush (unlike them IDPA shooters.......just kidding people), but it really does piss one off if when crap like that gets printed. Oh well.....live and learn.........

Odd,

that misreporting had to truly suck --- for you, your family, your partner and his family. Who was the idiot who suggested it to the reporter? Or do you suspect the reporter of fabrication?

BTW, while I'm sure that using deadly force wasn't on your list of things to experience in this life, I'm glad the situation ended up with the bad guy down and the both of you alive. Thank you for your service.

[EricW]

... one should assume that a significant part of one's audience might only have a sixth grade education. I was appalled by that statement --- until I remembered that everyone I meet every day might be a reader. I took the statement to mean "stay away from $20 words, when you can use 25 cent words," not that one should dumb down the concepts one's trying to explain. I suspect it's different for some of my colleagues....

Hence the reason I no longer read the paper. I won't even go into the issue of dumbing down America to the lowest common denominator, a destructive principle no matter what the motivation.

[gunduffer]

Errors were certainly made, but not just by the reporter. Yes, she garbled quotes, misspelled camoflage and thinks there are such things as "perspective" students (what, they look smaller as they approach the horizon line?) - a poor indication of skills for a supposed communicator. However, she's not alone.

We also have a "pre-law" major, which would also suggest a certain level of competency in language skills, who claims he was "eggregesly missquoted," cannot spell rhetoric or arguments correctly ("rethoric" and "arguements"), and who cannot distinguish between "by" and "buy" ("...an SMU democrat who said people could go by [sic] MP5ks at the store down the road").

Obviously, SMU is not concerned about the language portion of the SAT scores when determining admittance.

If the "pre-law" shooter was misquoted, I would hope he wrote a letter to the editor correcting the misrepresentations. Preferably a spell-checked one ......

[Jim Norman]

("...an SMU democrat who said people could go by [sic] MP5ks at the store down the road").

Perhaps they meant that people could travel past MP5s? It could have been a correct statment. Why do you have to be so quick to jump all over the Forth Estate just because they often act as fifth column?

Ok, Tongue in check humor mode off.

It is sad that the language skills of the populace have so diminished that errors such as those pointed out are common place rather than the exception.

I would like to take this opportunity to point out that any such errors ever made by me are attributable to the lack of spell check on the forum and to my own poor typing skills.

Jim Norman