New York Times Leads the Assault Media’s War on Guns

Sandy Hook aftermath (courtesy nytimes.com)

I’ve got a new one for you: “assault media.” That’s what I call media organizations who assault Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.  The New York Times recent front page editorial – calling for firearms confiscation – put them at the head of the mainstream media civilian disarmament campaign. (Provided you discount The New York Posts‘ unconscionable efforts to portray the NRA as terrorists.) Now the the Times has outed itself, it’s continuing its civilian disarmament campaign . . .

In the Times‘ N.Y. / Region Section (?), we get In Scotland, Unlike America, Mass Shooting Led to Stricter Gun Laws. That’s news? No. No it’s not. The Dunblane school massacre happened 19 years ago. The article is pure anti-gun agitprop: propaganda designed to agitate the masses into pursuing the paper’s gun confiscation agenda. Complete with the obligatory picture of the Newtown slaughter [above]. With not a single mention of the importance of American gun rights. Like this . . .

The tightening of Britain’s gun laws, which gave the authorities more control over the licensing of weapons, is seen as both a boon to public safety and a salve to the town’s collective grief . . .

Across the ocean and 16 years later, America absorbed its own massacre of 5- and 6-year-olds at the school in Newtown. The inaction that emerged from Washington, however, was the opposite of what came out of Westminster after the Dunblane shooting. And in the three years since 20 children were fatally shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School, no consensus on the rewriting of national gun laws in America has formed.

Rather, some say, the supporters of gun rights have seemed to gain strength, stymying President Obama’s efforts to craft laws that would help reduce the kind of mass shootings that now occur regularly around the country. The support for an automatic weapons ban, in fact, has seemingly been silenced.

Yes, I know: it’s an “assault weapons” ban. Not an “automatic weapons ban.” Inadvertent conflation or deliberate disinformation? Although I ascribe to Hanlon’s Razor – “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity” – it’s clear that this article is an anti-gun rights editorial disguised as reporting. Here’s the only pro-gun voice in the piece. Well, not really.

While the killings at Sandy Hook might have “hit over the head” people predisposed toward action intended to counter America’s epidemic of gun violence, “the rest of the nation was not hit in quite the same way,” said Samuel Walker, professor emeritus at the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Nebraska.

“There were more people who said, ‘Well, we ought to put more guns in schools,’” in the hands of law enforcement or security officers, Mr. Walker said.

To him, such a response reflects the worship of guns that exists in American culture.

Epidemic of gun violence! Gun worshipping [bible clinging] America! Is there a New York Times stylebook for “reporting” on guns? Or are the papers’ writers so inculcated in the Left’s anti-gun rights agenda that they all parrot the party line? Yes! But wait! There’s more!

“It’s like a religious object, an extension of your body,” he said. “We can’t begin to make any progress in controlling it.”

The United States has “high levels of interpersonal violence” greater than anywhere in Western Europe and it has embedded a cultural preference for guns in many corners of society, Mr. Walker said.

I guess the New York Times’ fact checkers were so exhausted after the Republican debate that they couldn’t muster the energy needed to shout WTF at the reporter – one Al Baker – who allowed Mr. Walker’s outrageous claim to run unremarked.

As you’d expect, the article ends with the assault media’s number one tactic: tugging at the heart-strings. What they’re actually doing is tugging on the thread of liberty. God help us if it’s undone.

comments

  1. avatar Mitch says:

    I think you mean “New York Daily News” instead of “New York Post”, right?

    1. avatar Warp says:

      Correct, someone at TTAG should fix that. NY Post is the one calling out the terrorists, they’re totally Murdoch.

      The NYDN, OTOH, are bringing yellow journalism to a whole new level lately.

  2. avatar Hamster in a Wheel says:

    Ah well. The Washington Post will do their best to one up them.

    1. avatar BigBoy says:

      Isn’t competition great?

  3. avatar Tom in Georgia says:

    “Assault media”

    I like that. Has a good ring to it. They certainly deserve it, too.

    Tom

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      Especially if you drop the final T and change the last vowel to a long O.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      I prefer “Brown Stream Media” personally.

  4. avatar Geoff PR says:

    “It’s like a religious object, an extension of your body,” he said. “We can’t begin to make any progress in controlling it.”

    I’m cool with that.

    And rather accurate, as America was founded on religious persecution.

    Gun control should be classified as a hate crime.

  5. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    ASSault media-I’ll steal that. Yours is good too Steve…

  6. avatar Binder says:

    What they should say in this article is that mass shootings happen everywhere. It’s just that the United States is the only place that the anti gun groups have not been able to leverage it into a total gun ban.

  7. avatar Nedd Ludd says:

    Rush has been calling the MSM the “drive-by” media for years.

  8. avatar pirateye says:

    Let’s pass “common sense” laws to control “tactical pens.” Reporters seem to spew nothing but bias. Reporting is a dead art.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      On the contrary, they report their own stream of consciousness admirably well.

      They don’t engage in yellow journalism any more, but they report on the yellow stream of consciousness just fine.

  9. avatar Don says:

    Reporters using their mouthpiece to artificially amplify their personal agendas…

    I wonder what would happen if there was a Professional Reporter’s Licencing Organization for being a reporter and reporting infractions could jeopardize your licence. Infractions would include incompleteness of facts or straying outside of the facts. Reporters would be encouraged to make dispassionate observations of events like scientists recording an experiment.

    If you wanted to conjecture, or argue for a particular agenda, then you are free to do so, but it’s not reporting and wouldn’t carry the Professional Reporter’s Licencing Organization’s stamp of approval.

  10. avatar Ethan says:

    Not helpful. Please refrain from bigoted slurs.

  11. avatar Ralph says:

    A couple of days ago, the NY Slime ran a front page “editorial” seeking, among other things, to deny gun rights to people on the so-called Terror Watch List.

    About a year before that masterpiece of bullsh!t, the same NY Slime ran an editorial entitled “Terror Watch Lists Run Amok.”

    The Slime noted: “A democratic society premised on due process and open courts cannot tolerate such behavior.”

    Except, it seems, when it comes to guns.

    I’ve included a link to the editorial for your amusement. Thanks to Prof. Eugene Volokh for pointing out yet another of The Slime’s lies and doublespeak.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/19/opinion/terror-watch-lists-run-amok.html?_r=0&referer=

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Nice link, but you see, despite appearances, the NYT isn’t being hypocritical at all. You just have to understand that the NYT does not see the Second amendment as a right; instead, all people should be denied the “opportunity” to keep firearms; anyone who wants a firearm is a criminal anyway. See? No problemo.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “You just have to understand that the NYT does not see the Second amendment as a right;”

        Why we need to create a Church.

        If Scientology can, why not us?

        The Church of Terminal Ballistics, perhaps.

        Our alter will be the shooting bench.

        Our Sacrament will be the private personal choice of our Parishioners.

        Tithing will be at your LGS, or mail order.

  12. avatar pg2 says:

    Considering 6 corporations own all mass media, is there any surprise about this? The NYT, with its disclosed financial ties to big pharma, is pushing against individual rights. Is it a coincidence the all-in push for gun control comes at the same time as the push for mandatory vaccinations?

  13. avatar John says:

    Somebody should send that link to the N Y Times. oh. Wait… Nevermind.

  14. avatar pod says:

    At least with the NY Times, the gloves are off. For years, the MSM largely lied and tiptoed around their take on the gun issue. By announcing they want Americans to “turn in” (by confiscation really) their ARs and other “evil” firearms, they have finally announced their point of view on private firearms ownership.

    Today they want to take away our ARs, tomorrow it’s any other long gun. After that, it’s pistols, then after that…

    It’s incrementalism. They are coming to take your guns, just over the course of many years.

    Australia is a perfect example. To this day, they still have politicians clamoring for even more gun control, despite them having extensive legislation already addressing the subject.

  15. avatar Leo says:

    NY Times is liberal crap, they are representing city where anyone could be raped, hammered, slashed with knife, hit by axe and anytime and without guns.

  16. avatar the ruester says:

    My favorite stat; compare the post ban crime rates of these socialist hellholes to the drop in ours with more CCLs. Forces one to confront the fact that those countries haven’t had American levels of crime since Jack the Ripper. Whenever someone brings up euro gun bans, and how they are the elixir for this issue, simply ask “when was (that country’s) murder rate ever as high as America’s?”

  17. avatar FedUp says:

    If Bruce Jenner can keep his penis and be considered a woman, then we can keep our guns and be considered disarmed.

    Since we’re all disarmed, shut up and quit trying to disarm us already…

  18. avatar foo dog says:

    For new readers, especially Millenials- this seems like a good place to drop in a link to this latest Colon Noir reaction to the Left’s collusion in a coordinated campaign to call for more gun control:

  19. avatar foo dog says:

    Remember- nearly a year ago I was predicting that patterns were emerging in meme’s and similar wordings among the well-known gun control groups, Brady, et al, and the Vox-splainers and embedded Journolistas.

    I said the Gun Grabber In Chief would use any excuse to double down on gun control, especially to distract from his failures in the economy-ObamaCare, foreign policy-the MidEast, Iraq/Libya/Egypt/Syria and now the Iran nuke deal, and his complete suppression of the ISIS reality, and the deeper truth behind it- that HRC was covering up Amb Stevens gun-running of the lost Stingers from Libya to Syria, to Al Nusrah (90% of whom became ISIS). There is more- including Saudi Wahhabi funding of madrassahs like the Red Mosque in Pakistan that birthed the San Bernardino shooters, Obama’s buddy in Turkey, paying ISIS for oil…

    Dancing in the blood of victims for gun control does so many things for this failed administration, not least covering the complete failure of the Progressive Agenda.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email