Why Would A Reporter Misreport A Semiautomatic Rifle As Automatic?

reply to post by Snarf


Opposition to the Second Amendment, and an agenda to limit it through fear mongering by deliberate misreporting. Here's a good editorial on this.

EDITORIAL: False reports about guns

Many media outlets have misfired about guns. Countless newspapers and television networks -- from CBS to MSNBC -- have misreported that conservative protesters are threatening President Obama with guns at public events. It hasn't happened.

In Portsmouth, N.H., a man carrying a gun, William Kostric, joined an Aug. 11 health care protest. This was blocks away and hours before Mr. Obama's town-hall meeting in that city. Mr. Kostric was given permission to be on church property where the protest occurred and was not at the place the president visited. What most of the coverage left out was that Mr. Kostric didn't carry his gun only for the protest; he legally carries a gun with him all the time for protection.

While the media regularly used terms such as "hotheads" to mischaracterize the situation, the coverage ignored that union members who opposed the protest had attacked Mr. Kostric and a friend, kicking, pushing and spitting on them. Despite violence against him by Mr. Obama's supporters, Mr. Kostric did not draw his gun or threaten anyone.

On the CBS Evening News, Katie Couric asked, "Are we really still debating health care when a man brings a handgun to a church where the president is speaking?" Deliberately or not, she got the facts wrong. As we know, Mr. Kostric did bring a gun to the church, but the president was not there and never was scheduled to speak there. Mr. Obama spoke at a separate event at a local high school at a different time. Not letting facts get in the way of her hysterical story line, Ms. Couric linked Mr. Kostric's gun to "fear and frankly ignorance drown[ing] out the serious debate that needs to take place about an issue that affects the lives of millions of people."

In another case in Arizona, a black man staged an event with a local radio host and carried a semiautomatic rifle a few blocks away from another Obama town-hall meeting. According to the radio station, the staged event was "partially motivated to do so because of the controversy surrounding William Kostric." This occurrence was not an example of an outraged gun-toting Obama protester, but a stunt to garner attention for a shock jock. Of course, this inconvenient truth was ignored by most news outlets.

MSNBC misrepresented the facts to try to back up a bogus claim about racism being behind opposition to Mr. Obama's agenda. On Donny Deutsch's Aug. 18 show about the Arizona town-hall meeting, the producers aired a clip of the anonymous black man carrying the so-called assault rifle -- but the network edited the tape so the man's race was obscured. Truth be damned, MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer said, "There are questions whether this has a racial overtone. I mean, here you have a man of color in the presidency and white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists." Another commentator on the same show worried about the "anger about a black person being president." The supposed result: "You know we see these hate groups rising up."

MSNBC's irresponsible behavior is more than just bad journalism; it sows distrust between races. Ernest Hancock, the radio host who staged the event, was hoping to get some free publicity for himself and his show. Whatever one thinks of this PR stunt, it had nothing to do with race. MSNBC misrepresented a black man carrying a gun as a white man to invent a racial dynamic that didn't exist.

Media disinformation about guns is a sad sign of the drastic action liberals will take to undermine support for gun rights for law-abiding citizens. It's also an indication of liberals' extreme desperation as Mr. Obama's agenda unravels.

and that is what i would call desperation.

The gun in question - if i am reading this article correctly - the gun is identified as an AR-15

for those of you who don't know what that looks like

you can see an image here


If this person were a big wig at the NRA and identified it as an assault rifle - then okay - i'd say you have a point, this person is an idiot.

But any average, every day, non-gun-crazy-lunatic would look at this gun and say "thats an assault rifle" not realizing that the ONLY DIFFERENCE between this semi-automatic AR-15 and a real assault rifle is that the assault rifle needs to have the ability to be semi or fully automatic.

You sensationalize to prove a point.

And if someone has to spread disingenuous claims in order to try and prove their agenda, i call that desperation. If you want to show a bias against the 2nd amendment - fine, there are LOTS of great examples out there to choose from.

This is not one of them.

reply to post by Snarf


OK, can you provide evidence for your discounting the KTVU reporter in this report as totally ignorant of firearms, and does no research on his reports?

Lloyd LaCuesta

Lloyd LaCuesta is KTVU Channel 2's South Bay Bureau Chief. He began working for the station in August 1976. Born in Honolulu, LaCuesta attended Cal State-Los Angeles and San Jose State, where he received a B.A. in Journalism and Political Science. He received an M.A. in Journalism from UCLA.

LaCuesta was news editor of the Radio and Television News Center at San Jose State and won the Sigma Delta Chi Award for documentary and news feature reports.

LaCuesta served in the U.S. Army as a military broadcast journalist for the American Forces Korea Network.

Before coming to KTVU, LaCuesta worked as a writer/editor for KNX/CBS Radio in Los Angeles and as a writer/producer for KABC-TV in Los Angeles and KGO-TV in San Francisco.

He has won Emmy Awards, received honors from the Peninsula Press Club, the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, and the Associated Press. He also recieved a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Asian American Journalists Association in 2004.

LaCuesta has been very active in bringing more minorities into the field of journalism. He is a past National President of the Asian American Journalists Association and was the first National President of Unity '94, which organized the first National Convention of America's Asian, Black, Hispanic and Native American Journalists. He currently serves as the director for the Asian American Journalists Association's Study Tours Program.

His most memorable career moments include: coverage of the first landing of the Space Shuttle at Edwards Air Force Base; his travels to the Philippines, the land of his parents; a flight into the Mt. St. Helen's volcano crater; and coverage of the trip of three fathers to Vietnam in search of the Amerasian children they left behind.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


That is a strawman argument.

Evidence to prove that this reporter has no professional background in guns is unobtainable.

Strawman Argument + Desperation + Sensationalism = ????

and to further prove my point - even i had the definition of an assault rifle incorrect at first. Another ATS member kindly u2u'd me to let me know.

So it kind of goes without saying - i was not propagating a wall be constructed in opposition of the 2nd amendment simply because i incorrectly identified what is and is not an assault rifle.

it's still a rifle. It's still used in combat. Police officers all over this country carry AR15's. And i've even heard THEM call it an assault rifle.

You are seriously clinging to nothing here. Why it bothers me so much, im not really sure.

Deny Ignorance. Stop creating it.

[edit on 22-11-2009 by Snarf]

Originally posted by Snarf
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

 

That is a strawman argument.

Evidence to prove that this reporter has no professional background in guns is unobtainable.

Strawman Argument + Desperation + Sensationalism = ????

OK. So you cannot backup your supposition this reporter is ignorant of firearms, and thus that's a moot point on your part.

and to further prove my point - even i had the definition of an assault rifle incorrect at first. Another ATS member kindly u2u'd me to let me know.

So it kind of goes without saying - i was not propagating a wall be constructed in opposition of the 2nd amendment simply because i incorrectly identified what is and is not an assault rifle.

it's still a rifle. It's still used in combat. Police officers all over this country carry AR15's. And i've even heard THEM call it an assault rifle.

You are seriously clinging to nothing here. Why it bothers me so much, im not really sure.

Trying to change my original argument from "automatic or semiautomatic" to "assault or not assault" is a sign of desperation on your part.

Deny Ignorance. Stop creating it.

[edit on 22-11-2009 by Snarf]

You should really start putting into practice your own advise, rather than just preaching it.

Calling people desperate and ignorant to try to back up your own unbackable arguments is desperate and ignorant on your part.

I wouldn't have a clue what the difference between an automatic and semi automatic gun is, let alone how to recognise one from the other. Just as well I don't want to be a media reporter in the USA because obviously I'm not properly qualified for the job

No wonder the rest of the world think Americans are odd ...

reply to post by Essan


So, the news reporters in your part of the world don't do research either when they are reporting on past events?

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


I wouldn't expect them to do a firearms course to report on an incident involving a firearm.

Of course, here in the UK 99% of the population think a gun is a gun - and neither know nor care about tecnhical details of what type of gun it is.

Different culture.



[edit on 22-11-2009 by Essan]

reply to post by Essan


So if a reporter was holding a double-barreled shotgun and said it was a fully automatic Israeli machine gun, the UK populace wouldn't question that?

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Yes, we'd know it was a shot gun. We have them in Britain. But the only way people would know the differnce between an automatic and semi automatic is if they played certain computer games. We simply don't have such guns in Britain.


But I guess my criticism may be a bit misplaced - in the USA where people do have much more knowledge of different guns perhaps a reporter ought to know better? Though I don't think it's really a big deal.


[edit on 22-11-2009 by Essan]

Would it really surprise you to learn a good many people spend their entire lives without ever touching a firearm???

It's true and a reporter/staff writer could very well be one of those and with no real experience or training never realize there is a jargon like Semi auto select fire and of course "ROCK & ROLL... Get Some... Hooraw"!

reply to post by Essan

But the only way people would know the differnce between an automatic and semi automatic is if they played certain computer games. We simply don't have such guns in Britain.

Or you could do an internet search on the event concerning the gun in question, and find a report as I did that identified the gun as an AR-15 semi-automatic.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

OK. So you cannot backup your supposition this reporter is ignorant of firearms, and thus that's a moot point on your part.

and you cannot back up your position that the reporter has malicious intent

In these situations - i love my friend Occam.

Sensationalism isn't "the simplest explanation"

but it sure is your method of choice in this topic.

Whats next? War on Peanut Butter & Jelly Sandwiches because people got cramps after eating them and drown in the swimming pool?

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

So if a reporter was holding a double-barreled shotgun and said it was a fully automatic Israeli machine gun, the UK populace wouldn't question that?

In this case, yes, you'd have a point.

There's a clear distinction between the two

In the AR-15 ... you don't have a point. You have nothing except disingenuous claims and a refusal to accept reality.

An AR 15 - to an uneducated observer looks like an assault rifle. It looks like several guns in any Call of Duty game, and like i said with the band-aid reference, its generally referred to as an assault rifle.

But you obviously refuse to accept it- since it totally defeats your agenda.

So have fun arguing with the wall.





case in point:

AR-15

M16

one is a true assault rifle

the other one just looks like it.


[edit on 22-11-2009 by Snarf]

reply to post by HarryCat



Exactly what I was thinking. If I posted up every stuff-up by our media in Australia I'd be a very busy woman!!!



Besides that, I have no idea whether a gun is semi-automatic, automatic, or a pop-gun just by looking at it.

I just wanted to clarify what is qualifies as an assault rifle.

Being able to switch between full, and semi auto does not classify something as an assault rifle.

To be an assault weapon it must have atleast 2 of the following, a pistol grip, a removable magazine, a bayonet lug and there a few other things I cannot remember off the top of my head.

My semi automatic sks was classified as an assault rifle.

I'll try to dig up some info on that.

EDIT to add:

My apologies, I was confused by the terms. "Assault rifle" and "assault weapon" are 2 different things. My post is in regards to assault weapons not assault rifles.



[edit on 11/22/2009 by ThaLoccster]

reply to post by ThaLoccster


i hope you can find that - because it just furhter proves why this OP was a farce to begin with.

Regardless of the defition however - the fact still remains:

It was a mistaken identify of a gun.

The point of hte reporter is still well taken - regardless if its assault or not.

reply to post by Snarf


I edited my post to clarify.

But I don't feel like the reporter did anything wrong. Like someone else said, they didn't state it was a fully automatic weapon, therefore the reporter was correct it is an automatic weapon.

Its no different than saying Obama is "black" although he is "mixed".

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
I just wanted to clarify what is qualifies as an assault rifle.

Being able to switch between full, and semi auto does not classify something as an assault rifle.

To be an assault weapon it must have atleast 2 of the following, a pistol grip, a removable magazine, a bayonet lug and there a few other things I cannot remember off the top of my head.

My semi automatic sks was classified as an assault rifle.

I'll try to dig up some info on that.

EDIT to add:

My apologies, I was confused by the terms. "Assault rifle" and "assault weapon" are 2 different things. My post is in regards to assault weapons not assault rifles.



[edit on 11/22/2009 by ThaLoccster]

Uhh.. no.

An assault weapon or assault rifle is a weapon that is capable of firing more than one round per trigger pull. That is the definition. Those accessories you mentioned were the items listed in the 1994 'assault weapons ban' that have nothing at all to do with how a weapon cycles rounds through the action. They have NOTHING to do with the term 'assault rifle' or 'assault weapon' other than that they were specifically named in that bill.

It takes less than 5 seconds (depending on internet connection) to go to dictionary.com and search 'assault rifle' and 'assault weapon'. Here are the definitions:

assault rifle
 
Use assault rifle in a Sentence
See web results for assault rifle
See images of assault rifle
–noun
1. a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.
2. a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usu. modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.

assault weapon
 
Use assault weapon in a Sentence
See web results for assault weapon
See images of assault weapon
–noun
any of various automatic and semiautomatic military firearms utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge, designed for individual use. Compare assault rifle.

But thanks, thanks a lot for spreading misinformation.

reply to post by angrysniper


lol

I even edited my post to clarify that I had mistook the 2 terms.

What you are referring to is an assault rifle. An assault weapon is classified as a different item, although an assault rifle could and would be an assault weapon, an assault weapon is not necessarily an assault rifle.

Assault Weapon

There are a variety of different statutory definitions of assault weapons in local, state, and federal laws in the United States that define them by a set of characteristics they possess. Using lists of physical features or specific firearms in defining assault weapons in the U.S. was first codified by the language of the now-expired 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban.[1] Very generally speaking, a semi-automatic firearm is defined by these laws as an assault weapon if it has both a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, sometimes in conjunction with other features such as a folding stock or a flash suppressor.

Which is exactly what I said.

No misinformation there.