Last month, we caught ABC dubiously reporting the use of an “automatic rifle” in a Philadelphia crime. In that case, the police may have made that original claim. (I have a Pennsylvania Right To Know Law request pending on that.)
This time, I think they really stepped in it.
Indiana teen driver fatally shot by backseat passenger holding AR-15 style assault rifle: Police
A 19-year-old Indiana woman — described by her pastor as a “bubbly young lady who had a bright future” — was fatally shot when a 22-year-old friend riding in the backseat of her car accidentally discharged an AR-15 style assault rifle, according to police.
Mainstream news reporting of “assault rifles” and the like irks me. You might think it a minor point, but it has definitely caused more people to support gun control proposals, because they were — as intended — confused about the firearms being targeted.
My own mother got tricked by the assault weapon/assault rifle line. She was shocked when I didn’t support a ban on “machine guns,” and even more shocked when I explained the proposals had nothing to to do with those.
“Then why would they say that?” she wondered.
“So you’d be fooled, just like you were,” I told her.
And they’re still at it. I found it doubtful that the firearm in this shooting was an assault rifle as ABC’s Bill Hutchinson claimed, attributing it to the Marion Police Department. I asked Hutchinson where he got that information. He replied:
Hi @BearBussjaeger the story I wrote reads ‘an AR-15 style assault rifle,’ which is what the first paragraph of the Marion PD statement says. Later in the release, police specified it was a .223 caliber rifle, which was noted in the story. https://t.co/7KG6ZQgo4X
— Bill Hutchinson (@bill_hutchinson) December 2, 2019
Really? Let’s take a look.
Not there; even the word “assault” doesn’t appear. How about this one?
Not there either. There is “assault style rifle,” which a far cry from “assault rifle.” I asked Hutchinson for a copy of the statement he read, which allegedly says “assault rifle.” Surely he saw a statement I didn’t find.
-crickets-
ABC: making stuff up for years and years. When they aren’t covering it up, that is.
You would expect something different from American Broadcast Communists.
Owned by the Corporate Mouse, so…
Yes, the MILITARY definition of an “Assault Rifle” covers only select fire rifles firing an intermediate rifle cartridge. But we all know that the military is the only place that definition is used today.
Among the media and the general public “Assault Rifle” simply means any rifle that looks like a copy of any real assault rifle or that shares a similar appearance or similar cosmetic features.
As for whether ABC news made anything up or got the claim from the police, face facts and admit that yes they did get it from the police statement that you included in your article. Your assertion that “assault style rifle,” is a far cry from “assault rifle” is complete nonsense. You are trying to expect the media to use the strict military definition and that simply isn’t realistic. Stop tilting at windmills and save your rhetoric for fighting battles worth fighting.
I completely understand what your saying. It is a losing battle.
The problem is that words do mean things. Just like the ones used on your birth certificate and your lifes worth of mecical records. If we are to so easily dismiss this simple and basic consept of human communication, then what is the point in anything the whole of the human race has ever accomplished within all recorded history?
If we are just going to give up and grant complete control over to ignorant people with a tenency toward mental instability, then none of this is worth pursuing anymore. That includes your next post.
“Among the media and the general public “Assault Rifle” simply means any rifle that looks like a copy of any real assault rifle or that shares a similar appearance or similar cosmetic features.”
And as long as we accept their definition that there is no difference between spray guns and semis we’ll see more of the sand slip beneath our feet. Saving for a bigger fight makes the fight bigger.
You’re both missing the point, or at least the target. ABC isn’t the bad guy here. The local P
D. is. Claiming that the term assault style rifle is a “far cry” from assault rifle is asinine. That’s a hair’s breadth of a difference, an inconsequential difference. ABC may be guilty of other sins, or even this same sin in other cases, but not this one this time. They got the equivalent term from the P.D. statement.
The only one forfeiting credibility here is Mr. Carl Bussjaeger, who has posted a blantaly sensational piece for clickbait purposes. You just made the list, Bussboy. Your shit gets skipped from here on out.
Geez, this site is sure going to crap since the sale. R.F., if you’re reading this, just as soon as your noncompete expires, start up a new TTAG style gun blog. (Bussjaeger, did you see what I did there?)
There’s a lot of know-nothings on the anti-side. People who think magazines are one-time use, or a barrel shrouds is “shoulder thing that goes up,” etc. We know there’s a difference between “assault rifle” and “assault weapon” or “clip” and “magazine,” but they probably don’t. Don’t attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity..
Word meanings change with time. We say “I use Kleenix when we really use Puffs”. I say I drive a car, but it’s really a SUV. At Christmastime do you “don your gay apparel”? Fa la la la la la la. (insert musical notes here) The media is doing a great job changing the names of any gun that doesn’t look like an old cowboy gun.
I’m going to disagree.
I own a “military style assault rifle”.
I can go to the local gun store and buy more.
What I can’t do is go to a local gun store and buy an assault rifle (unless it’s used, and I pay a LOT of money, and go through a lot of government “mother may I” bullshit).
Maybe the difference between being able to buy one and not the other is a small thing to you, but I seriously doubt doubt it is to a lot of other people.
Now, having said that, I will agree that the general public is not aware of the difference, but that’s on the media, because they have certainly been told often enough that they should be able to communicate this to their readers well.
So, yes, the media is lying to the public. The question then is this: why is that so?
We know the reason. Do you?
“I own a “military style assault rifle”.” No, you don’t, unless you have a tax stamp from the ATF. Class III weapons are regulated under the NFA of 1934 and are a very specific class of firearms, and if you didn’t get a Class III weapon then you do not have an Assault Rifle of any kind. You may have an “assault weapon”, a meaningless term used by the gun grabbers to scare the uneducated or intentionally obtuse into buying into their political agenda, but you do not own an assault rifle.
You’re missing the point.
What something is called doesn’t mean that’s what it is.
That the gun I’m talking about is called a “military style assault rifle” by the hoplophobes doesn’t mean it is one in reality.
That’s the point.
My only source of info about the military comes from a long time friend and retired USMC Sgt. He says he never heard the term “assault rifle” used to describe any firearm while he was active. Anyone know for certain if the term is used by any branch of the military?
It probably isn’t.
“Assault rifle” is a historical term that’s technically accurate, but it isn’t in use anywhere except among us, because we’re trying to counteract the media and politicians’ deliberate misuse of the term, and of course among the media and politicians who use it deliberately as a disinformation tactic (or because they’re ignorant pieces of crap).
Damn, I wish everyone was so picky about words when referring to the 2cnd amendment.
If you have a gun the whole Marvin scene from Pulp Fiction should be mandatory watching. Don’t be stupid people.
I am a lot less concerned about the fact that ABC ever-so-slightly misstated the police press release and MUCH more concerned that the police press release used the totally fabricated and non-sensical term “assault style”.
Asking why the people with ambitions to run the world would ever seek to deceive.
Bless her heart.
The “gun control” is easily confused by the term “assault weapon/rifle,” and it’s probably the goal. Any modern sporting carbine or rifle fits the definition of these evil, high-tech, mass murder tools. If it has a pistol grip and you can insert a magazine, it’s so “assault” you could have won Verdun by yourself! If on top of it it has the word “tactical” associated with it, or it comes with a Spartan or Punisher logo, it’s probably more dangerous than sarin gaz, and I have heard you can become blind just by looking at it. There are also true liberal stories of “assault rifles” escaping from the safe at night and randomly shooting people left and right. Finally, the mass shooter at Virginia Tech wasn’t trained like a Navy Seal and he caused chaos with handguns.
Is there any evidence that the firearm in question was even an “AR-15” derived or styled firearm? AR-15 rifles have manual safety which makes an accidental discharge unlikely.
The police should release a photo of the gun involved.
That’s a really weird story. Who taught the idiot in the back seat how to handle a rifle? Even if a round was chambered and the safety was off, and even if he was recklessly pointing it right at someone, why the hell would he pull the trigger? Finger on the trigger and hit a bump perhaps? What an idiot.
From Pulp Fiction. “I just shot Marvin in the face!”
hey at least it was not full-semi-auto?
IMO that ex general even saying that…he should still be doing push-ups till this day!
According to the Australian Greens, we have semi-semi-automatic firearms. And they are really clutching their pearls over this onem
If ABC and the rest of the lamestream media keep dumbing it down, they will eventually get to the point where their stupidity matches the stupidity of the average American.
We used to be a smart people. Then we turned our education system over to a bunch of 60s burnouts and Communists wannabees. From that point forward, we started to get really stupid.
They couldn’t get away with that crap if people would educate themselves a bit instead of leaving it up to someone else. I had to educate someone that more individuals have donated one million dollars to the NRA than have gun companies.
Great information, I would recommend it to my friends for them to check out. Thanks for sharing! If you have more time, please visit: https://shell-shockers.online
What really bothers me is that uninformed and non-gun owning people see the letters”AR” attached to the gun and automatically assume it stands for Assault Rifle. When I tell them it is the original trademarked manufacturer’s designation called Armalite Rifle Model 15 or Model 10 they don’t believe it because the press would not lie about that stuff. Only gun owners and the NRA lie about that. Smart anti-gunners co-opted the abbreviation and it has stuck. In addition, people equate a semi-automatic rifle as a machine gun. Heck, my own wife when she first shot mine though she was shooting a machine gun. The messaging battle is lost on that point and having to explain the difference between a semi-automatic rifle/pistol and a machinegun gets tedious to people who don’t want to know.
Same here. I get looked at with shock and amazement as if to say that I know nothing about it and should be blown off. Sometimes it “I’ve never heard that before”.
All news is “fake news”. Including this article.
“News” outlets no longer report the news. They create articles based roughly on real life events with enough slant that a target audience will click on them and nod their heads. If you know better, or disagree with the article, then clearly you weren’t the target audience.
The vast majority of people who believe in the second amendment understand that the terms “assault rifle”, “assault style rifle”, “military style” and all the other versions and terms the anti-second supporting media use interchangeably are bogus. We see it and hear it daily. Letting it get your blood pressure up will only lend itself to you stroking out early and them have one less person to oppose them. They are their terms, they are ubiquitous. They have a right to free speech, even when they have no idea what they are talking about.
Had one once and the thing was useless, figured it would get rid of a rodent problem, and you know what the stupid thing did, it just laid their would not get up and go outside and do what I wanted. So I put it outside and still it didn’t work, Then I really got mad and relegated it too be a barn rifle, Stupid thing still refused too do what it was built for and bought for, and that was too Assault something {predators}, pretty sad it even refused too oil itself(I know that sounds kinky) but it’s true; any way it rusted pretty good! Last time I believe them when they say Automatic Assault Rife, thing is lazier than my 14 year old dog!
We contacted ABC and their local affiliate WRTV in Marion, IN about this story as well. We made them aware of the existence of the RTS TriggerShield which may likely have PREVENTED this, and similar, tragedies. I’m curious to see if they care to spread information about how to possibly AVOID these terrible accidents or if they are just trying to exploit them for the anti-gun narrative. http://www.ShootOnPurpose.com
Here is a look at the RTS TriggerShield run by Jeremy at TheTruthAboutGuns.com.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BlvHm8LDofo/
I’m curious to see if they care to spread information about how to possibly AVOID these terrible accidents or if they are just trying to exploit them for the anti-gun narrative
Special someone, this site is without a doubt fabulous, i only love it
Comments are closed.