“This is not a neighborhood where you’ve frequently had to deal with sort of stray bullets and gunfire being associated with other types of crime is it?” No, of course not. Only yes. Yes it is. If Ms. Maddow’s minions had Googled “lincoln park denver crime rate” they may have discovered this little tidbit from streetadvisor.com: “Artists and some young urbanites love the area, and with good reason, but unfortunately, high crime and poverty rates make that life less than ideal for many residents and make a painful contrast with the thousand-dollar abstract paintings hanging in the galleries.” Wikipedia on Lincoln Park . . .
The crime rate and poverty rate are also much higher than city and national averages. The crime rate is 196 incidents per 1,000 people and a poverty rate of 37.64%.
Anecdotal evidence of non-Obama-related gunfire in the area? Here’s one that went down two blocks east of Lincoln Park last March from denverpost.com:
A man was shot on the sidewalk on Lipan Street between West 12th and West 13th avenues this afternoon. He was rushed to nearby Denver Heath Medical Center in critical condition, said police spokesman Sonny Jackson.
Why didn’t Maddow do her homework?
Willful ignorance. Maddow didn’t fully consider/investigate an alternate theory for the Lincoln Park shooting because she doesn’t do the “fully consider” thing. She starts with a world view—conservatives are evil, violent, selfish dopes—and then shoehorns the facts to fit. No matter what the topic. Consciously and subconsciously.
It’s easy enough to assume that Maddow found it easy enough to assume that the bullet that struck the Obama campaign storefront was aimed at the Obama campaign storefront. Those evil, violent, selfish conservatives have guns! Why wouldn’t one of them take a pot shot at the well-intentioned political operatives trying to make life better for the 47 percent? It’s common sense!
This [unexpressed] pro-gun = dangerous dudes hyperbole is nothing new. It reached its zenith in 2010, when the media did everything in its power to smear the Tea Party. Maddow and Co. portrayed America’s most polite protest movement as proto-insurrectionists. Armed proto-insurrectionists. By extension, any American who owned a gun and didn’t support the President and/or government was a threat to society.
In her search for character assassination ammunition, Maddow made the trip to the NRA convention. She misrepresented members’ firmly held belief that the Second Amendment is America’s most effective bulwark against tyranny as, well, white power. “The guys with the guns make the rules.” NRA (and Tea Party) members have the guns. They’re white. Do the math.
Thankfully, that approach didn’t work out so well for Maddow and Co. I’m not exactly sure why the left-leaning anti-militia meme ran out of steam. I think it was a confluence of factors: gun law liberalization created millions of 2A-aware owners, the mainstream media’s dominance continued to decline, Heller and then McDonald kicked in, and no armed insurrection occurred.
Today, a media campaign to portray all gun owners as whack jobs would find fallow ground. We need only look at the lack of legislative reaction to the recent spate of spree killings for evidence that gun control advocates have lost momentum. But the cause—and the media bias for their cause—lingers, like a virus, ready to “flare up” should conditions be right.
Gun control advocates need to understand that we cannot lower our guard or surrender one inch of territory to those who would remove our civil right to armed self-defense. We cannot let media prejudice and ignorance go unchallenged. And while Maddow and Co. wait to “move the needle” on “the national debate about guns,” we must fight our battles one at a time, on the local level.
Like this [via The Virginia Citizens Defense League]
I was contacted by a gun owner in Surrey County who has been waiting for over 3 months for his permit. The Circuit Court Clerk, Ms. Gail P. Clayton, is refusing to issue a temporary permit as is required by law. I contacted Ms. Clayton and advised her she was in violation of state law and that she needed to get the temporary permit out forthwith.
She was not a happy camper, insisting that she could not issue even a temporary permit without the judge’s OK. She said the sheriff’s office was still trying to verify the background on the applicant. I showed her where the law required her to issue the temporary on day 45 with or without the judge’s approval and with or without the background check results. If the sheriff is taking too long, then that is too bad.
I advised her that she needs to obey the law. Either issue the temporary permit, have the judge deny the permit (with a full explanation for the grounds of that denial), or issue the actual permit.
If she is still refusing to do her job next week, I will suggest to the Board that we get a writ of mandamus issued to force her to do her job.
She’s an elected official and she needs to remember exactly who she is serving and that she is not above the law.