Home » Blogs » Perhaps the Stupidest TV Report on Guns In the History of the World, Ever

Perhaps the Stupidest TV Report on Guns In the History of the World, Ever

Robert Farago - comments No comments

I’m sure there’ve been more inane reports on firearms on TV news. I just can’t remember seeing one.

Photo of author

Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the former publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

0 thoughts on “Perhaps the Stupidest TV Report on Guns In the History of the World, Ever”

  1. This could almost be a modern art piece on the lack of content in modern reporting. “Fluxx piece” doesn’t even begin to cover it

    Reply
  2. Lads, I was one of the ones who thought that Obama wouldn’t touch gun control. I said so here, in this forum, many times. I never said he didn’t want to ban guns, but I thought he was too smart a politician to try. I was wrong. You can take the mea culpa for what it is worth.

    We have been banged up a bit at the state level, and my sincerest condolences to the denizens of Colorado and NY. But I do think the broad point of the OP is right, though we have a long and vicious political fight ahead. We have stalled the advance, at least. We need to engage fully. We can turn this back, nullify some of the bad laws in court, and push the law even further toward fuller 2A rights. It’s going to take time, and money, and a lot of bullshit.

    For my penance, I’ll not vote D ever again. I may not be able to vote for a Republican in some fights, but the Dems have come down decisively against gun rights. I, like many others, thought they were drifting away from that shit, but they were just hiding it. We need to make them pay, where it counts, at the ballots.

    Reply
  3. They will never stop. Gun control will never die. It’s like universal healthcare. They will be very patient and attempt to get what they want bit by bit by bit.

    Reply
    • They’ve actually been quite clever about universal healthcare. The emphasis on hospital care, which encourages rent-seeking to the tune of up to six times the price charged by an independent specialist, has gradually eroded the supply of privately-practicing physicians and, especially, surgeons. The change to direct reimbursement of physicians, rather than of patients, along with insurer pricing agreements, has created a local oligopoly of medical care, driving up prices.

      Too, the emphasis on medically futile heroic interventions for dying men and women drives a large part of Medicare costs. Hospitals make most of the money off said interventions because they have the equipment and staff to perform them. Personally, I don’t want to be kept “alive” by a forest of tubes at a cost of $3,000 a day if I’m already on my way out. Pneumonia is an old man’s friend.

      So, because we refuse to let people die without cracking their chest open in a code and then putting them on a ventilator until their back is covered in bedsores, medical care costs our society a great deal. People generally don’t realize this because they don’t see the cost, at least not all at once. Indeed, that’s most of the point of insurance, spreading out payments to be more manageable; this unfortunately tends to ruin the pricing mechanism.

      The other side of this is encouraging the poor to seek medical care via EMTALA. The poor don’t generally get good continuity of care, or even baseline prophylactic care, so their health problems worsen relatively quickly, and they have little incentive to take care of them until they become acute, because Uncle Sam will, generally, pick up the tab for emergency care far more readily.

      The optimum is to go full-private or full-public, but there is a lot of pressure towards a public system, especially since insurers have been spending an increasing amount on nebulous “overhead,” driving up the cost of private insurance. Since each insurer is essentially part of a colluding local oligopoly, and their payouts track the Medicare reimbursement ceiling, the price of insurance is generally not reduced by market competition. The individual mandate will make insurance prices even worse, especially for young people, which is part of the point: transferring much of the cost to the young and healthy (who also, coincidentally, have the largest unemployment rate at present).

      Reply
  4. I bought a new golden boy in .22lr, the rifle shots way high. I adjusted the rear sight all the way down, still shoots high? Any body out there that had this problem?

    Reply
  5. I’m not buying into the innocence of the victim here. True, he didn’t deserve to have his home invaded , but If his roomate was into drugs he’d know about it.My current roomate once bragged about smoking weed in his hometown, and that prompted me to create an understanding regarding drugs;one, nothing in our house, period. Two, I would personally kick his ass if ANY LE agency kicked in our door on account of his choice of activities.

    Even if your roomate is on the level, home carry. Crooks can hit the wrong address too.

    Reply
  6. If politics wasnt so entrenched in BS and politicians such BS artists in the first place this wouldnt be a problem.

    Like any lie the longer it goes on the worse it gets.

    Just be honest. It’s a lot easier and a lot less stressful.

    Reply
  7. There’s an easy out. The socialists simply need to book a Carnival cruise to any of any of a number of totalitarian states where the people are already under the boots of the government and they won’t feel the compulsion to destroy non-existant freedoms.

    Reply
  8. maryland they are wanted dead too, buts its a hush-hush secret because we would not want to offend the libotards. I feel like some of the libotards in Maryland tolerate the hunters like the Amish Mafia – they know we are needed to keep the deer and coyotes at bay, but shhh dont talk about it!

    Reply
  9. I guess I’ll never understand it:

    I know lots of “liberals” who support “gun control”. I don’t know ANY that care enough to make it a crucial Senate election issue. I know the media gives the few who do lots of publicity, but I don’t see how Democrats gain anything by voting for “gun control”.

    Reply
  10. Interesting comments. We have similar conclusions. I have both cameras as well which I am going to start using on my next set of DVDs. I purchased the Contour with the longer lens and custom built a mount to sit it on the top of my AR rail looking through the front site. This gives me a nice shooter’s perspective of the target.

    I found that I prefer the POV of the Hero mounted on the forehead. Gives a more natural perspective compared to the Contour on the side.

    Reply
  11. Obama said he will campaign for the assault weapons ban as soon as he gets back from Israel.

    Obama focused his weekly address on the Senate’s gun control efforts, reminding Americans of the Sandy Hook massacre.

    “These ideas shouldn’t be controversial – they’re common sense,” Obama said. “They’re supported by a majority of the American people. And I urge the Senate and the House to give each of them a vote.”

    Reply
  12. I home carry for a reason. Of course, I dont hang out with shady people. By the time I get from my living room to my safe, Ill be like this guy or dead. I dont understand why its so weird and unnessecarry to home carry like some will have believe

    Reply
  13. I agree with Ralph.

    I think it wont pass. But to counter dim bat Biden we must still call and email all Sens and keep the pressure on.

    Agree Ralph?

    Reply
    • Agree totally. Thanks to Reid, it won’t pass if we keep fighting it. If we take our foot off the accelerator for even a second, we’re screwed. The gungrabbers are all in. We need to re-raise and remind them that we’re not the only ones with skin in the game.

      Reply
  14. Notice that they have to use the Sandy Hook incident to fuel the argument.

    It’s basically turning into 9/11/2001 for me. I’ve stopped giving a crap about that specific event.

    Yes, it’s sad. Yes, it’s a tragedy. Yes, we need to learn from our mistakes and yes we need to make the future not have that happen. However, nothing they want to pass would have made a difference if it was in effect when the incident happened, and the nation really needs to stop dwelling on the past. It sounds rude, but I get really *really* aggravated when someone brings up a specific incident in the past as for why we need to focus our efforts.

    Note that no one cares about any other gun incidents, or the random guy shooting rivals in gangs, or any of the other random acts of terrorism we’ve had over the years, and people only focus on the big events to push agenda. I can see through the BS a mile away.

    Reply
  15. A Rossi .32 cal revolver that my sister in law gave me. It was her fathers and I am keeping it until my nephew turns 21 so I can give it to him in a nice keepsake box

    Reply

Leave a Comment