Let the media attack begin

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by bcj1755, Apr 4, 2009.

  1. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    Analysis: Nation negotiates minefield of bad news
    AP

    By TED ANTHONY, AP National Writer Ted Anthony, Ap National Writer – 1 hr 15 mins ago

    PITTSBURGH – Does the name Byran Uyesugi ring a bell? Odds are not. What about Robert A. Hawkins? Or Mark Barton? Terry Ratzmann? Robert Stewart?

    Each entered the national consciousness when he picked up a gun and ended multiple lives. Uyesugi, 1999, Hawaii office building, seven dead. Hawkins, 2007, Nebraska shopping mall, nine dead. Barton, Ratzmann and Stewart — 24 dead among them in 1999 (Atlanta brokerage offices), 2005 (Wisconsin church service) and last week (North Carolina rehab center).

    And each has been largely forgotten as the parade of multiple killings in America melts into an indistinguishable blur. We bemoan, we mourn, we move on.

    What's even more disturbing is that the list above was cherrypicked from a far lengthier tally of recent mass shootings in the United States. And now, this weekend, on a crisp, sunny Saturday morning in Pittsburgh, the lives of three police officers ended in gunfire after a domestic dispute turned lethal.

    The mass shootings that left 14 people dead in Binghamton, N.Y., on Friday were horrifying, depressing, nationally wrenching. They were also, to some extent, unsurprising in a society where the term "mass shooting" has lost its status as unthinkable aberration and become mere fodder for a fresh news cycle.

    "We have to guard against the senseless violence that this tragedy represents," President Barack Obama said in Europe on Saturday. Senseless violence: Two centuries from now, if we're not careful, it could be an epitaph for our era.

    Even in a media-saturated nation that encourages short memories, these numbers are conversation-stopping: Forty-seven people dead in the past month in American mass shootings and their aftermaths. It's to the point where on Saturday, dizzyingly, the mayor of Binghamton found himself offering Pittsburgh its sympathies.

    Put aside for a moment the debate over guns. This isn't about policy. It's about asking the urgent question: What is happening in the American psyche that prevents people from defusing their own anguish and rage before they end the lives of others? Why are we killing each other?

    This is not an era of good feeling in the United States. We have under our belt eight years of pernicious terrorism angst, six years of Iraq war weariness and, now, months of wondering how bad the American economy's going to get and when — or, worse, whether — it's going to come back. People are tense. There's less inclination to help out your fellow human being.

    Meanwhile, anchors and analysts and witnesses and bloggers cast about in an information-age fog trying to make sense of something that is, in the worst way, nonsensical. They rush to offer solutions, but the thing they typically dodge is that we seem to be powerless to stop it all — that our community, our neighbors, may be next. That's too terrifying to contemplate, not to mention too open-ended for American news consumers reared on tidy Hollywood endings.

    The Binghamton newspaper, the Press & Sun Bulletin, seemed to acknowledge the resignation in a glum editorial Saturday that wondered if it was simply, sadly, and inevitably Binghamton's turn to give up a few of its people to the juggernaut.

    "It is our turn to grieve and to rally in support of those whose lives have been shattered," the newspaper said. "And it's our turn to hug those in our own families and wonder how a quiet, rainy Friday in a peaceful place became the setting for such a nightmare."

    The strangest of contradictions hangs over the Binghamton shootings. The shooter and many of the victims were immigrants — part of the pool of human beings who look to America as a place of opportunity and take often anonymous steps to realize their dreams here. On Friday, the idea that had beckoned them betrayed them.

    The man believed to be the shooter, Jiverly Wong, had lost his job at an assembly plant, was barely getting by on unemployment and was frustrated that the American dream, so highly billed and coveted, wasn't coming through for him. Early reports suggest that the suspect in the Pittsburgh officers' killings, too, was angered at being laid off from a glass factory.

    People are of course responsible for their actions, but it's hard to avoid wondering what's afoot in the darkest recesses of what we like to call American exceptionalism. For so long, the national narrative has been so bullish about equality of opportunity, so persuasive in its romance of possibility for all. Is it so subversive to speculate, then, that when the engine of possibility runs into roadblocks, people can't cope?

    Without excusing one whit of the violent tendencies that ended with so many bullets in so many bodies from Binghamton to North Carolina to Alabama to California in the past month, isn't it time, finally, to figure out where this national dream makes a wrong turn?

    "Maybe research can prevent further tragedies of this type," a man named Charles Whitman wrote one day in 1966. Then he ascended a tower at the University of Texas, looked out over the campus, pulled out a shotgun, three rifles and three pistols and killed 16 people.

    Forty-three years and countless reams of research and lost loved ones later, we have not figured it out. Today, the American Civic Association in Binghamton says so. The Pittsburgh Police Department says so. The vulnerable people at the Pinelake Health and Rehab Center in Carthage, N.C., say so.

    Of Jiverly Wong, Binghamton police Chief Joseph Zikuski had this to say Saturday: "He must have been a coward." Perhaps. But that's the beginning of an answer, not the end of one. On Friday, the federal government announced that 663,000 Americans lost their jobs in March. What's truly unsettling in America's new era of gloom and dead ends is wondering how many of those 663,000 might be deeply, irrevocably angry about it — and might have a gun.

    Because the American tragedies that haven't happened yet are the most terrifying ones of all.

    ___

    EDITOR'S NOTE — Ted Anthony covers American culture for The Associated Press.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090404/ap_on_re_us/numbed_nation_analysis


    Here's a member of the "fair and impartial" media taking stock of the body count of recent shootings. Here's the beginnings of the press and gov't working together to stir up public support for more gun laws.

    "They rush to offer solutions, but the thing they typically dodge is that we seem to be powerless to stop it all — that our community, our neighbors, may be next. That's too terrifying to contemplate, not to mention too open-ended for American news consumers reared on tidy Hollywood endings."

    WRONG! Yes we CAN protect ourselves from these whackjobs. It's quite simple...allow national concealed carry. More armed people walking the street, less whackaddos willing to try and shoot places up. And even if they do try, then all it takes to stop it is ONE armed citizen willing to intervene.

    "What's truly unsettling in America's new era of gloom and dead ends is wondering how many of those 663,000 might be deeply, irrevocably angry about it — and might have a gun."

    Ok, now plant the seed of fear in the sheeples' heads that any gun owner is prone to snapping and killing innocent people just because they're angry or depressed:rolleyes:


    I guess I should get ready for a continuing onslaught of these types of liberal brainwashing attempts. The press is just regurgitating what Barry and his puppetmasters are telling them to say. They can't really harp on the Mexican cartels having guns anymore since ATF just came out and disproved that lie, so now they're changing tacs to harp on all the recent whackjobs going out and killing people. This is the beginning of the latest attack on our rights to self-defense. What these people don't realize is that if our guns are banned, then the whackamoles will STILL have firearms and will STILL be able to massacre innocent people at any time they wish. The only change will be that we will NOT be able to defend ourselves and will be totally dependant on the police and gov't for protection. A whackjob can kill an innocent person in seconds, while the police are minutes away.
     
  2. ilovenxstage

    ilovenxstage New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    147
    Location:
    Indiana
    +1 Let's see, I've been dealing with a lot of depression and discouragement the last couple years, and I have a rifle and two pistols right next to my bed. Gee I haven't taken my guns and shot up public places because I'm upset that my health is bad. Stupid liberal turds.
     

  3. 94z07

    94z07 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    337
    Wait a minute now...

    The esteemed 4th estate tells us that Muslims aren't dangerous that only a tiny fraction of the billions of muslims are dangerous.

    Why aren't they telling us that only a very tiny fraction of the millions of gun owners are dangerous to innocnet people?
     
  4. ponycar17

    ponycar17 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    5,062
    Location:
    South Carolina
    We're in for more of the same. The current administration is defying all that rationally dictates economic success in their venture to shut down US manufacturing and cripple the US economy. Personally, I think they know this intuitively. They undoubtedly want to cripple American manufacturing through such things as cap and trade legislation that will punish an already-suffering US manufacturing industry with more taxes and fees. They also have hurt the American economy by telling people, effectively not to buy when your job is unsure. With a FREAKIN' American GDP of 67% American internal purchasing, what do you think will happen to American manufacturing when you tell everyone not to buy?!?!?!?! This dumbass Administration and Congress is crippling America, and it's intentional!!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

    When economic strife occurs, crime increases proportionally. That is what's happening now. We've seen the crime increase and we've heard the fictitious reasoning for increasing US gun laws due to crime in Mexico already. Massive changes are coming if we don't stand together and show our opposition.

    It's time to take a stand, NOW!!!!
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2009
  5. Islandboy

    Islandboy New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    675
    Location:
    Off the right coast
    Perhaps if they win in getting rid of guns, we pressure them to get rid of the Muslims too?
    I'd rather be in a crowded place with everyone armed than in a "safe" gun free zone with one %&s carrying.
     
  6. Haligan

    Haligan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,713
    Location:
    FEMA Region II
    I hate to be in the middle of a game and realize your up against a much better opponant. But I got to tell ya, with all the moves this administration is doing with the economy it seams like they groomed this society to tear itself apart.
    I think we're up against a better opponant. And if you think I'm wrong then tell me, Why are they winning ?
     
  7. Haligan

    Haligan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,713
    Location:
    FEMA Region II
    I hate getting my #@% kicked !
     
  8. SaddleSarge

    SaddleSarge New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,025
    I'm getting pretty tired of wearing a black band on my badge. My prayers for the families of all the victims...citizens or LEO's. :(
     

    Attached Files:

  9. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    The victims, be them civilian or LEOs, and their familes are the ones that suffer. The gov't and liberal media uses these murdering whackjobs to further their insideous goal of disarming us. They don't care about a few more dead civilians or cops, as long as Barry's puppetmasters reach their goal:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: This s*** pisses me the f*** off!!!!!!!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
     
  10. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    And here's ANOTHER "fair and impartial" peice of "news" reporting from the drive by media....

    Gunman 'lying in wait' kills 3 Pittsburgh officers
    AP


    By RAMIT PLUSHNICK-MASTI and DAN NEPHIN, Associated Press Writers Ramit Plushnick-masti And Dan Nephin, Associated Press Writers – 2 hrs 22 mins ago

    PITTSBURGH – A gunman wearing a bulletproof vest and "lying in wait" opened fire on officers responding to a domestic disturbance call Saturday, killing three of them and turning a quiet Pittsburgh street into a battlefield, police said.

    Police Chief Nate Harper said the motive for the shooting isn't clear, but friends said the gunman recently had been upset about losing his job and feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns.

    Richard Poplawski, 23, met officers at the doorway and shot two of them in the head immediately, Harper said. An officer who tried to help the two also was killed.

    Poplawski, armed with an assault rifle and two other guns, then held police at bay for four hours as the fallen officers were left bleeding nearby, their colleagues unable to reach them, according to police and witnesses. More than 100 rounds were fired by the SWAT teams and Poplawski, Harper said.

    The three slain officers were Eric Kelly, 41, Stephen Mayhle, 29, and Paul Sciullo III, 37. Kelly had been on the force for 14 years, Mayhle and Sciullo for two years each. Another officer, Timothy McManaway, was shot in the hand and a fifth broke his leg on a fence.

    Poplawski had gunshot wounds in his legs but was otherwise unharmed because he was wearing a bulletproof vest, Harper said. He was charged with three counts of homicide, aggravated assault and a weapons violation.

    The shooting occurred just two weeks after four police officers were fatally shot in Oakland, Calif., in the deadliest day for U.S. law enforcement since Sept. 11, 2001. The officers were the first Pittsburgh city officers to die in the line of duty in 18 years.

    "This is a solemn day and it's a very sad day in the city of Pittsburgh," Harper said. "We've seen this kind of violence happen in California. We never would think this kind of violence would happen in the city of Pittsburgh."

    At 7 a.m., Sciullo and Mayhle responded to a 911 call from Poplawski's mother, who remained holed up in the basement during the entire dispute and escaped unharmed, Harper said.

    When they arrived at the home, Sciullo was immediately shot in the head. Mayhle, who was right behind him, was also shot in the head.

    "It appears he was lying in wait for the officers," Harper said.

    Kelly, who was on his way home after completing his overnight shift when he heard the call for help, rushed to the scene and was killed trying to help Sciullo and Mayhle, Harper said. SWAT teams and other officers arrived and were immediately fired on as well.

    Don Sand, who lives across the street from Poplawski, said he was woken up by the sound of gunfire. Hunkering down behind a wall in his home, he saw the first two officers go down and then saw Kelly get shot.

    "They couldn't get the scene secure enough to get to them. They were just lying there bleeding," Sand said. "By the time they secured the scene enough to get to them it was way too late."

    Deputy Chief Paul Donaldson, who lives nearby, was one of the first officers to arrive. He saw Mayhle by a bush to the right of the door; Kelly was in the street and McManaway, his hand injured, was kneeling beside him, yelling that Kelly needed help.

    Donaldson suggested using a police van to get them. They draped a bulletproof vest on the window to protect the driver and several officers got into the van to get Kelly and McManaway.

    During this time, Poplawski was somehow distracted, Donaldson said.

    "We were fortunate that he didn't fire on us. I don't know why he was distracted, but he apparently didn't see us coming down to get them," he said. "It could have been worse."

    Poplawski had feared "the Obama gun ban that's on the way" and "didn't like our rights being infringed upon," said Edward Perkovic, his best friend.

    Perkovic, 22, said he got a call at work from him in which he said, "Eddie, I am going to die today. ... Tell your family I love them and I love you."

    Perkovic said: "I heard gunshots and he hung up. ... He sounded like he was in pain, like he got shot."

    Poplawski had once tried to join the Marines, but was kicked out of boot camp after throwing a food tray at a drill sergeant, Perkovic said.

    Another longtime friend, Aaron Vire, said Poplawski feared that President Barack Obama was going to take away his rights, though he said he "wasn't violently against Obama."

    Vire, 23, said Poplawski once had an Internet talk show but that it wasn't successful. He said Poplawski owned an AK-47 rifle and several powerful handguns, including a .357 Magnum.

    Obama has said he respects Americans' constitutional right to bear arms, but that he favors "common sense" gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he would approve some curbs on assault and concealed weapons.

    Poplawski had been laid off from his job at a glass factory earlier this year, said another friend, Joe DiMarco. DiMarco said he didn't know the name of the company, but knew his friend had been upset about it.

    The last Pittsburgh police officers killed in the line of duty were Officers Thomas L. Herron and Joseph J. Grill, according to a Web site that tracks police killings. They died after their patrol car collided with another vehicle while chasing a stolen car on March 6, 1991.

    In 1995, an off-duty officer was shot with his own gun after he confronted a group of teenagers about graffiti. Tests later showed the officer had been drinking.

    According to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, 133 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty in 2008, a 27 percent decrease from year before and the lowest annual total since 1960.

    Poplawski had often fought with neighbors and had even gotten into fist fights with a couple, Sand said.

    "This is a relatively really quiet neighborhood except for him," Sand said. "He was just one of those kids that we knew to stay clear from."

    Harper confirmed police had responded to calls from the Poplawski house several times but said the incidents were still being investigated.

    Rob Gift, 45, who lives a block away, said the well-kept single-family houses with manicured lawns are home to many police officers, firefighters, paramedics and other city workers.

    "It's just a very quiet neighborhood," Gift said.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090404/ap_on_re_us/pittsburgh_shooting


    "Police Chief Nate Harper said the motive for the shooting isn't clear, but friends said the gunman recently had been upset about losing his job and feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns." and "Poplawski had feared "the Obama gun ban that's on the way" and "didn't like our rights being infringed upon," said Edward Perkovic, his best friend."

    Ok, now they're starting to paint anyone opposed to Obama as a gun nut seething with murderous rage:rolleyes::rolleyes: So pretty soon, when those of us that don't agree with Barry speak out, we'll have the cops called on us for being a "potential hazard to public safety." Speak out against Barry's comming AWB and they'll say you're an angry depressed person who will start a muder spree at any moment:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

    "Poplawski, armed with an assault rifle and two other guns," and "He said Poplawski owned an AK-47 rifle and several powerful handguns, including a .357 Magnum."

    AGAIN with the "assault weapons"?!?! Ok, those of us that own AKs are just ticking timebombs waiting to go off in an orgy of blood and guts and just plain EVIL:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: I love how the press just keeps on harping about these a**holes that commit these horrendous acts with "assault weapons." I own an AK, but I don't assault people, and neither does my AK:rolleyes::rolleyes:

    "Obama has said he respects Americans' constitutional right to bear arms, but that he favors "common sense" gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he would approve some curbs on assault and concealed weapons."

    And here's the press AGAIN bowing down and kissing Obama's a**!!!! I like how they use the term "gun rights advocates." A gun is an inanimate object, I didn't know that inanimate objects had rights:rolleyes::rolleyes: How about "self-defense advocates" or "Constitutional advocates"? Oh wait, those terms would require the press to actually be fair and impartial. They can't suck Barry's a** if they were actually fair and impartial.:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

    Here's an idea, why don't you feds try prosecuting these whackadoos under the EXISTING guns laws instead of trying to make it harder for honest law-abiding citizens to protect themselves from these kind of people? Your gun laws don't seem to be stopping criminals and crazy people from obtaining firearms. But then, restricting guns has never been about crime or self protection, it's all about disarming the American people so the global socialists can walk in and take over.
     
  11. SaddleSarge

    SaddleSarge New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,025
    Then we must be very methodical in our response since the issue is not the gun, but the response in the act of the violence and disregard for not only the law, but that of humanity.

    I responded to a domestic violence homicide scene once wherein I felt the last pulses of the female victim. As I entered the room, I had difficulty maintaining my balance due to slipping in the copious amounts of blood from both husband and wife.

    The wife died there as I felt for her pulse, and the husband a couple of weeks later of self inflicted wounds. The wife sustained 26 wounds, many of which were defensive wounds. The husband sustained 32+ self inflicted wounds of which he died from, as I said, a couple of weeks later.

    The instrument used was not a pistol, assault rifle, automobile, or other heinous device. The instrument of violence was "rage," which utilized a 2" paring knife.

    There was no outcry from the community to ban 2" paring knives. There was no outcry that such a ban would have shielded the 2 year old son, at his birthday party with Grandma and Grandpa present, from witnessing this act by his father against his mother.

    My point, while going a long way around the barn, is that the issue is unrestrained violence without consequence. It's video game mentality of, "game over, press start to replay." We are witnessing and participating in a societal degradation of values taught to us by our predecessors.

    Dare I say that we are also dealing with an aspect of society that holds the ideal of humanity to a much different level than that of Judeo-Christian beliefs or the despondency that the events of the day create. Homicide has been around since Cain and Abel. Instant news and communication wasn’t around then except for what the all seeing had knowledge of.

    We, as responsible law abiding gun owners, need to impress upon our law makers (that we "elect") that violence and criminal acts are the issue and that there are laws upon the books that address this. The instrument is merely a side bar. The more we focus on the instrument, the more we give them their fodder, for we give the instrument credibility instead of the "act."

    There are victims' families out there tonight whose hearts weep. Those that didn't expect the violence in their innocence, and the families of those that responded to restore that innocent ideal in their oath not only to the constitution, but to that of what is morally right in that humanity that didn’t expect their loved ones not to return home after offering that protection.

    Let not any of their deaths, victims or first responders, be in vain in the idea of the instrument, but rather, that of the ideal, the act, without remorse or penance. IMHO.:(
     
  12. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    All very true. I've been on six ridealongs with the county police and have heard some stories similar to yours. WE know that the violent criminal is the problem. WE also know that another part of the problem is that the gov't never seems to want to punish the criminal for the crimes. I've heard stories about that from officers with whom I've ridden. Stories about arresting the same person for the same crime 6, 8, 10 times, sometimes more, and then the courts always cut the perp loose with a slap on the wrist so he can go back out on the street and do it again. The police do their job, for the most part. The courts don't do theirs. We're seeing the result of years of liberal infestation of gov't. They won't let parents punish their children and teach them right from wrong. They take God out of every public venue that they can. They won't let parents teach their children how to use firearms anymore. The kids now grow up with no moral compass, so they have no concept of working for a living nor the difference between right and wrong. They want what THEY want, regardless of the concequences. Then when they get into trouble, the courts barely punish them, the liberal media makes the criminal out to be the victim, and the victim plays a race/bad childhood/mental illness/depression/drug abuse/etc card to escape taking responsibility for their actions. The liberals have allowed these criminals to run wild, yet the liberals want to take away our right to defend ourselves from these criminals.
     
  13. SaddleSarge

    SaddleSarge New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,025
    BJC, we're arguing the same point (I believe).;) The real "criminal" in my view anymore, are the ones that state that they hold dear the ideal yet don't/won't vote and/or won't let their beliefs known to their representatives within our "republic."

    I hold in disgust, those that I talk to that say they believe in the constitution and/or our system of government, yet they don't vote or contact their reps... ever. It is not possible to both, hold our way of government/country in high regard without exercising the responsibilities that correspond with that "right."

    If those of us that believed in those ideals were more vocal in that contact and vote, we would not be experiencing the follies we now enjoy.

    We're right, they're wrong. But when only 33% show for a vote and less let their reps know what they think, we reap what we sow.
     
  14. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    Oh yes, we are very much on the same page with this. Very much so.