After the $hit$torm of criticism that befell CNBC following their tendentious, poorly researched handling of this week’s GOP debate, you might think that other mainstream media outlets would be watching their journalistic P’s and Q’s a little more closely. At least for a while. Maybe they’d do their homework just a smidge more diligently. You’d probably expect, for instance, that one of Texas’s major newspapers would take the time to — we’re just blue skying here — read and understand a new law that affects the safety of tens of thousands of the state’s students before pontificating on the shortcomings of its provisions. You’d be wrong about that. As Madison Welch of Students for Concealed Carry notes . . .
Here is evidence that the editorial board of the San Antonio Express-News hasn’t actually read Texas’s new campus carry law, which they rail against in an editorial published Saturday, October 31 . . .
- With regard to restricting concealed carry in certain locations, the Express-Newseditorial board writes, “This is understandable. As are restrictions on guns where controversial people are invited to speak and public places on campus where alcohol is served or consumed in vast quantities— such as sporting events.” REALITY: The new campus carry law continues the existing prohibition on concealed carry at college sporting events.
- The Express-Newseditorial board also writes, “There should even be active debate on whether guns are allowed in dormitory rooms — students’ homes on campus.” REALITY: The new law not only gives colleges broad discretion to create gun-free zones but also specifically authorizes colleges to regulate the storage of firearms in dorms.
- With regard to the university committees set up to study the law and enact relevant policies, the Express-News editorial board writes, “And these committees must make clear expectations on when concealed weapons carriers can take their guns out of their holsters.” REALITY: The new law, in concert with existing sections of the Texas Penal Code, already dictates that a license holder may not draw or display his or her weapon unless facing an immediate threat.
Before writing further on this subject, the editorial board of the San Antonio Express-News should first read the law they’re actively opposing and then review SCC’s thirteen questions explaining “Why Campus Carry.”
I’m shocked, shocked I tell you. 8>O
Good luck with getting the nay-sayers to read the legislation. They already know better than we others. Just ask them. Their air of superiority mitigates any need to check facts.
I used to subscribe to the old San Antonio Light because it had a bigger and better comic section. Now I see the comics begin on the cover of the Express-News.
The Light was classic, what a paper should be. Which is why it had to be destroyed.
As for the CNBC “$hit$torm,” given that those clown moderators are still employed and the network is still in business, it hasn’t been nearly enough of a “$hit$torm” One or the other of those factors needs to change, then the result will have been satisfactory.
Remember where their money comes from: Sponsors!
Write each and every one of the sponsors you see on the Communist News Broadcasting Cabal (CNBC), letting them know that, as long as they spend their advertising dollars supporting this propagandistic “news” machine you will no longer spend ANY of your hard-earned dollars on their products or services.
“Money Talks, Bullśhit Walks.”
The mainstream media can’t and won’t be shamed no matter how silly they end up looking or how many clusters they end up it. When the Internet devastated the majority of their revenues, especially for print, they were left with one viable revenue source, subscriptions. Instead of trying to broaden the subscription base, they went hard left basically, halving their potential customer base. Even as red ink piles up, more layoff and consolidations, they will not change how slanted the coverage is. They’d rather go bankrupt that be balanced and risk hurting the progressive cause.
Sounds like the paper is owned by NBC.
They are both wrong about having a gun at a sporting event… page 6 a.1.A. If you are licensed to carry a handgun and the school do ant forbid it you can carry at school sponsored events…
Also if they ban it but don’t post a 30.06 sign it do ant carry the force of law…
That stereotype about “knee-jerk liberals”–it isn’t a “stereotype”.
While stereotypes, like all generalities, cannot apply to every member of the given group, they are often based on some generally recognized trait found among many in that group. Just sayin’.
I see the “anti” types continually manipulating data, creating data, and creating illogical connections while the pro-2A crowd keeps using verifiable data and anecdotal evidence ignored by major media. When you need to get creative or be vague to make points, maybe you don’t have a point. If you can’t be bothered to read a law you want to argue, you don’t have an argument.
“Facts? Facts? I don’t need no steenken facts!!”
Reporters/Editorial staff are not Journalist anymore. Just Barbie & Ken dolls who look good and spout off on stuff that all the “cool people” think is acceptable. Sure don’t want to miss those all those cocktail and dinner parties by not being PC
Your comment reminded me of the Innerpartysystem video for Don’t stop. There are two versions which trash on the media.
But we had to pass it to see what was in it. Because of this it doesn’t make sense to read it.
I stopped reading the SA Express News long ago as it ceased to be a professionally written journal and it’s only value is for the fish wrap that it is.
What are P’s & Q’s? And how exactly do you mind them?
Ps & Qs
When people used to misbehave in old time pubs they would be asked to watch there pints and quarts (like stop throwing them around) hence watch your ps and qs
I always understood it to be a typesetter’s thing. Since typesetting was done by hand and the type was reversed, a lowercase “p” and a lower case “q” were often mistaken. You chose the “p” for “q” and vice versa.
This is very similar to the explanation I had always heard, and makes a great deal of sense. My version was that primary school teachers when instructing students in writing, would admonish them to “Watch your p’s and q’s” so they would not mistake one for the other. I would like to admonish RF, since this is the second time in about a week that this has appeared in a TTAG post, that the rule applies to p/q, not P/Q. Since we’re talking about editorial scrutiny here.
Its not the job of the news media to be fully aware on the subject that they are reporting on. It has not been for a very long time.
Just like the Board in San Fransisco against High Bridge Firearms, just like the Seattle city Board, these people have an agenda which removes them from a need for integrity. They define the term self-righteous.
Stil to mutch off places there and draconials consequents thats start in an lot of places white felony charge.
Lets hope of the hb 308 bomb 2017 !!
Interesting that Students for Concealed Carry apparently didn’t read the new law either. The new law does not continue the existing prohibition of concealed carry at sporting events. Starting August 1, 2016, concealed carry at collegiate sporting events will be legal unless the school puts up legal 30.06 signs at the events.